[page 3]
After the cold war
This is the most disturbed period in world relations since that which followed the Versailles treaty at the end of World War One.
HE COLLAPSE OF the Stalinist regimes T of Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union
has dramatically altered world relations. From 1945 to 1989 the world situation was dominated by the two super-powers of US imperialism and Stalinist Russia. Whilst resting on different and mutually antagonistic social systems, which resulted in intensive competition and clashes mainly in a 'cold' fashion, they nevertheless leaned on one another to bolster their own position. Capitalism used Stalinism as a scarecrow against the threat of revolution. Stalinism, particularly Russian Stalinism, invoked the threat of imperialist invasion to keep in check the movement of the working class. This largely bi-polar world was engulfed in the revolutions of 1989 and the subsequent disintegration of the Stalinist regimes.
talinism was the common
enemy and the glue that
und world imperialism
together.
The Russian revolution, and then following this Stalinism which arose enormously strengthened in the aftermath of World War Two, re-shaped world relations at the cost of undermining the power, incomes and strategic interests of the main imperialist powers. It decisively altered the class balance of forces on a world scale. Without the competition between US imperialism and Stalinist Russia for strategic and other advantages, the colonial bourgeoisie would never have been able to achieve its post-war relative independence. The collapse of Stalinism, together with the effects of the 1980s boom and the seeming triumph of 'the market, has resulted in an increased tendency of the colonial bourgeoisie to abandon this relative independence and become more and more brokers for imperialism.
The collapse of the planned economies was undoubtedly a defeat for the world proletariat. its ideological effects on the worker, particularly
internationally, this development, however, does not signify a great historic setback on the scale,
2 • March/ April 1993
bo
for instance, of the inter-war period.
The strength of the working class and its organisations remain largely intact. Capitalism has undoubtedly scored an ideological victory. But with the onset of a world economic slowdown this victory has been short-lived. Ironically the collapse of Stalinism, rather than strengthening world capitalism economically, has had the opposite result. The need to underwrite the unification of Germany led to the huge German budget deficit, which has in turn been a key factor in the currency chaos and the virtual disintegration of the ERM.
Eastern Europe and • the Soviet Union have collapsed into neo-barbarism with the mass pauperisation of the majority of society. Yugoslavia splinters along national, racial and ethnic lines. A national conflagration, to dwarf all others, looms in the ex-USSR.
This chaos unfolds while capitalist spokesmen wring their hands, impotent to prevent the disintegration of societies promised a dazzling future by returning back to capitalism. The strategists of US imperialism envisaged a 'unipolar' post-Stalinist world with the untrammelled rule of capitalism led by one great power (its own), able to impose 'order' throughout the globe. Instead the most disturbed period in world relations, comparable only to that which followed the Versailles treaty after World War One, has been ushered in.
TALINISM WAS THE common enemy and
S the glue that bound world imperialism
together, acting as a check on inter imperialist rivalries. There is no one power, like ÜS imperialism in the immediate post-war situation, capable of imposing its will on world capitalism. In 1945, the US accounted for more than half of world industrial output. While still the dominant economic power it now accounts for a quarter of world output, being economically challenged by Japan and Europe.
The hardening of the world into three great trading blocs, a process bemoaned by the strategists of capital, is a polite way of saying that a ferocious inter-imperialist struggle, every much as bitter as in the inter-war period, is under way. The whole of the world is being drawn into either the dollar, the deutschmark, or the yen bloc. And within the blocs there is
[page 4]
a jockeying for position and increasing rivalries.
The contest between the blocs takes the form,
at this stage, of gripes, complaints against one
another, and occasionally open trade restrictions,
as with the recent US 'anti-dumping measures
against foreign steel imports. While shoring up
their position in their own backyard, each of
the blocs seeks to steal a march on its rivals.
Japan has sought to consolidate its position in
the Pacific Rim, battling for supremacy with
the US. Trade between Japan and the six
nation states of South East Asia has expanded
at a phenomenal rate of 20% each year. Japan's
trade in the Asian markets now accounts for
40% of its total trade, with North America | 30%.
Five years ago, both regions accounted for
35% of Japan's foreign trade. The fear of being
shut out of the American market, indicated by
the formation of the North American Free Trade
Association, has prompted Japan and its Asian
satellites to group together in the 'yen bloc'.
Japan is also seeking to use Britain as a
backdoor into Europe, with 41% of its total investment in Europe concentrated in Britain.
The new Japanese prime minister, Miyazawa, has proclaimed that "Asia will be the brightest spot over the next century". He perceives this glowing future for the region under the tutelage of Japanese imperialism. The Japanese bourgeois deny any military ambitions. However, the recent controversy over the deployment of the Japanese defence forces, as part of a general strengthening of international order', indicates a future potentially powerful military role for a rearmed Japanese imperialism.
The scale of the tension between the US and Japan, under past conditions, would have led at a future stage to war. However the existence of nuciear weapons as well as the class balance of world forces, particularly of the working class in both countries, prevents an armed confrontation between US and Japanese imperialism.
In the post-war period the main doctrine governing the military relationship between imperialism and Stalinism was 'MAD', Mutually Assured Destruction. The same concept, that the nuclear powers can wipe themselves out in the event of war, underpins the main antagonism which now exists between the three capitalist blocs. War is conducted by the capitalists not for its own sake but for markets, raw materials, for political and strategic purposes. The existence of nuclear weapons ensures that in the event of a war mutual destruction would follow. It would also mean the destruction of the productive forces and above all the most important productive force, the working class.
Only if the working class suffers a decisive defeat and military dictatorships in the main capitalist countries ensue could the conditions be created for a nuclear war. Long before this the working class will have many opportunities
Miyazawa, worried by trade war.
to take power. A limited nuclear war' is a contradiction in terms and, moreover, would result in mass opposition, uprisings and revolutions. In the "Third World', however, the position is different. War between unstable and increasingly militarised regimes is not only possible but inevitable.
The future then is one of
intensified economic
conflict between the US
and Japan.
The future then is one of intensified economic conflict between the US and Japan. Europe will be drawn into this vortex, the consequence at a certain stage being a contraction of world trade, economic stagnation and slump.
At the same time, in the vacuum created, the appetites of the lesser imperialist powers have been aroused. Thus the Turkish bourgeoisie, shut out of the EC, seeks to bring the 'lost souls' of the former Ottoman empire under its sway. The Turkic-speaking peoples of the former USSR, largely repelled by the Islamic fundamentalist regimes, are attracted to the 'secular' Muslim state of Turkey, as are the Bosnian Muslims. And as the Gulf war demonstrated, Turkey would not be averse to using Iraq's difficulties to grab territory there.
Compared to the euphoria of three years ago, We have won' declared the Wall Street Journal, the world bourgeoisie now stands impotent before political and economic developments. World growth' seems elusive, with most serious commentators discounting a return to even the rates of growth of the 1980s. Pessimism 1 and deep foreboding prevails: 'trade war has replaced nuclear war as the easy way to international suicide. And yet, notwithstanding these warnings, the GATT negotiations remain stalemated. While it is not
March/April 1993 • 3
[page 5]
excluded that some kind of paper deal can be patched up, the OECD's chief economist has recently not ruled out a 1930s style slump. An open trade war could precisely plunge world capitalism from a growth slow-down/recession into slump.
Already it is estimated that 34m will be unemployed in the OECD countries by the end of 1993. This will be 10m more than three years previously. Thus, elements of the 1930s have begun to develop on a world scale, with a permanent stagnating pool of mass unemployment, slow, meagre growth and the features of a long, drawn-out world economic depression. Not a single economic problem - of growth, the elimination of unemployment, the huge gap between rich and poor, the tendency towards protectionism - is capable of being solved by decaying capitalism.
The countries of Eastern Europe, although not yet having experienced a drop on the scale of Russia, are not far behind. The proletariat is in a stunned and semi-demoralised state. Nevertheless a recoil will take place once the masses perceive that their sufferings are not at all 'temporary but will become their normal state on the basis of capitalism.
The strikes of the Polish miners and the Kiev arsenal workers are an anticipation of what is likely in the coming period. In the latter case the workers marched on the Ukraine parliament after a 300% hike in prices. The government, afraid that the arms workers could trigger a more general uprising, hastily retreated and doubled the minimum wage.
Profound disillusionment with the consequences of the market, if not completely with the concept of 'the market, has set in. It is those who were first in the queue who express the greatest disenchantment. Thus, a bare 6% of Hungarians - the fat cats who plundered state property say that conditions have improved since the 'demise of communism': 73% think that the system they now have is completely 'misconceived'.
An even greater disenchantment exists in Poland. The seeming deadlock in society, with a myriad of small parties competing for power, the unbearable social tensions and the resulting weak government, has put the spectre of authoritarianism, of coups, or Bonapartist regimes, onto the agenda.
'Democracy' is not an abstract ideal for the masses. It is perceived as the acquisition of democratic rights, to vote, freedom of assembly, to form trade unions etc, not as an end in itself, but as a means to a better life. And when the results of 'democracy' are the bitter fruits currently being reaped, it is not unexpected that deep despair should set in, leading to the rejection of 'democracy' by a layer of the masses.
Alongside of this is the first signs that the
masses' rejection of 'wild capitalism' has taken the form of looking back to some of the 'certainties' of the past. A mood of rejection of the most
brutal representatives of renascent capitalism
has also emerged. Thus, in Lithuania, which
probably went further down the road to the
market than any of the states of the former
USSR, plummetting production and living stand-
ards resulted in the rejection of the bourgeois
Sajudis leadership of Landsbergis in favour of
the former Communist Party, now re-christened
the 'Democratic Labour Party'
These developments, with similar processes in
Bulgaria and Romania, do not indicate a return
to Stalinism. The victors promise a more humane'
progress to 'the market. They nevertheless an-
ticipate a future class polarisation in all the
societies of Eastern Europe and the former
USSR. This will ineluctibly lead to the creation
of separate, class-based parties of the prole-
tariat.
The dream of
of capitalis
tp
new period rosperity is
ruled out.
The dream of a new period of capitalist prosperity where conflict would be muted or even eliminated is ruled out. In fact the world picture is one of disorder and unbearable economic, social and political tensions.
It is also accompanied by the international phenomenon of weak capitalist governments, plagued by doubts, hesitations and retreats in the face of a hostile and disenchanted population. The Reagan-Thatcher era, of seemingly strong governments able to ride rough-shod over the working class, is consigned to history. Their place has been taken by cardboard cut-outs, feeble imitations - Major, Kohl, Mitterrand and the hapless Bush - besieged by their own populations. The near contempt in which all 'politicians' are held, both in Europe and in America (indicated by the 19% protest vote for Perot in the presidential elections) is the first outward expression of what will become in the future a huge revolutionary wave.
The 1990s will be characterised by a reawakening of the European proletariat, already underway, but above all by the decisive entry onto the scene of the German, American and Japanese working class.
"HE PROMISE OF a capitalist El Dorado
in Eastern Europe and the former USSR
has turned to ashes. The drop in production in Russia has far outstripped that which took place in America during the 1929-33 crash. There is in fact a combination of 1929-33, a massive drop in production, with elements of Germany 1923, that is, hyper-inflation. The majority of the population have been pauperised.
4 • March/April 1993
[page 6]
However, it will take a further period of painful experiences before first of all the advanced workers and through them the masses begin to reject the idea of capitalism and the gross inequalities, poverty and unemployment which is its consequence today. In the course of such a movement a new generation will arise, not yet even involved or contemplating political involvement, who will return to the ideas of genuine Marxism, purged of its Stalinist excrescence.
Consequently, while the medium and long-term perspective will be for an inevitable resurgence of a regrouped workers' movement. the noscihilit"
and Tajikhistan.
Enormously weakened economically, Russia still possesses a formidable military machine, whose specific weight within the population is undiminished. The power of the generals was revealed in their virtual public countermanding of Yeltsin's offer to cut down Russia's nuclear arsenal. A total of 36 million people, a quarter of the entire population, live off arms production. Despite recent reductions, Russia will still have an army of 1.5 million and has enough long-range nuclear weapons, 3,000 by the last count, to destroy the planet many times over.
The Ileanina
ur millary-ponce dictatorships in Eastern Europe and the states which formerly made up the USSR, should not be excluded.
int ukraine, on the other hand has 70nnnn
troops. Even with big reductions promised, the Ükraine has more tanks, armoured vehicles and combat aircraft than any other country in Europe after Russia. The seeds of future conflict, which could result in devastating armed clashes, were shown in the squabble over the Crimea. Economic collapse and with it the threat of an uprising of the discontented masses, means that the fledgling capitalist classes in these states are already edging towards a form of Bonapartism, in the case of Yeltsin of parliamentary Bonapartism.
'HE COLLAPSE OF
former multi-na-
tional states, a little
taste of which has been
given in the bloody con-
flagration in Yugoslavia, on a capitalist basis necessarily involves a nightmare scenario for the masses. The processes are indicated by the military picture following the collapse of the Warsaw Pact. In 1989 six members adhered to the pact. Following the recent split between the Czech lands and Slovakia, there are now 21 separate armies in the region. ancient ethnic and national tensions dormant or were suppressed under have been resurrected.
The little entente, the pre-war agreement between Romania and Czechoslovakia against Hungary, has once more been floated, this time involving Romania and Slovakia. Hungary, leaning on the Ukraine, is arming to the teeth, with weapons it has bartered with Russia in payment for debts outstanding from the latter. Hungarian minorities exist in both Romania and Slovakia as well as former Yugoslavia. They will be a bone of contention between the new capitalist states which at a certain stage could result in armed clashes.
Indeed, Yugoslavia could merely be a dress rehearsal for a new Balkan war. And the upheavals in Yugoslavia are nothing compared io the looming clashes which could develop in he former USSR. On the fringes of the former Soviet Union war or armed conflicts already fect Georgia, Moldavia, Armenia, Azerbaijan
Yugoslavian refugees flee.
Moreover, which lay Stalinism
N THECOLONIAL
world, while there is a
disparity between re-
gions and between different countries within the same region, the general picture is of stagnation and even regression, with Africa facing a catastrophe. With economic collapse has come intensified racial, religious and tribal divisions, which in parts of Africa have all but wiped out the very concept of the 'nation'
The collapse of Stalinism had a more profound effect in the colonial and semi-colonial world than in the advanced industrial countries. The colonial bourgeoisie has increasingly abandoned any pretence to independence with the loss of its ability to manouevre between the great powers. Imperialism has undoubtedly been given a freer hand to intervene and subdue the colonial masses by the collapse of Stalinism. Without the support of the former Stalinist states Bush's deployment of such massive military might in the Gulf war would have been extremely difficult.
At the same time, this intervention starkly revealed the severe limitations imposed on even the strongest imperialist power. It showed the
March / April 1993 • 5
[page 7]
US troops in Somalia.
difficulty of any long-term occupation of decisive areas of the colonial and semi-colonial world. This lesson has been underscored by events in Yugoslavia and will be further demonstrated by the experience of US imperialism in Somalia.
It is above all the class balance of forces, particularly in its own domestic sphere, that conditions the limited character of US imperialism's incursions abroad. The memory of Vietnam still weighs in the national psyche of the American people. Short-term 'police operations' can be tolerated, but only on condition that not too many bodybags come home. This was a factor in preventing the US from completing the Gulf war by occupying the cities of Iraq and overthrowing Saddam. It was one thing to bomb an already retreating army out in the desert. It was another thing to become embroiled in occupying the urban areas of Iraq.
Even in a largely rural environment, Somalia, US imperialism could suffer heavy losses with the inevitable rejection of the Somali workers and peasants of their 'liberators'. Already significant support for Islamic fundamentalism has been witnessed, taking the place, temporarily, of the 'Somali nation'.
It is the fear of Islamic fundamentalisen which also explains the limited character of the measures taken against Saddam. Saddam is bad enough. What could follow his forcible overthrow could be even worse as far as the US is concerned The policy of the US then is to wound but not to kill. Hence the limited 'no fly zones' in the north and south.
The Saddam regime is based on the Sunni minority in the central area around Baghdad.
6 • March/April 1993
The majority of the popula-
tion, 55%, are Shia Muslims,
largely concentrated in the
south. It is true that the
Iran-Iraq war demonstrated
that it was the concept of
belonging to the Iraqi or Ir-
anian nation which was pri-
mary rather than religious
allegiances. However, Iranian
Shiite Islamic fundamental-
ism still exercises a powerful
attractive force for the im-
poverished Iraqi masses, as
it does throughout the whole
of the Middle East. Imperial-
ism would prefer a regime
other than Saddam's but in
the final analysis would tol-
erate and even support a
Saddam-dominated Iraq
rather than an Islamic fun-
damentalist regime.
It is the morbid fear of
such a development throug-
hout the Middle East that
forms an axis of US imperialism's policies in the region. The vacuum which exists, following the collapse of Stalinism, has been partially filled by Islamic fundamentalism. In Algeria, Egypt and Jordan, as well as amongst the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, a big increase for these ideas has been witnessed recently. So rotten is the former alleged 'socialist' regime of the FLN in Algeria that a real possibility of an Islamic fundamentalist regime taking power in the next few years is posed.
hich exists, The vacuu
following the collapse of
Stalinism, has been
rtially filled by Islamic
fundamentalism.
'O THE WORKERS and peasants of the
colonial world the regimes of Eastern Europe
and the USSR did provide to some extent a 'model' of how to escape from imperialist domination and its attendant poverty and deprivation. They did at least provide the basics of food, shelter, social services ete despite their authoritarian one-party regimes. Their collapse undoubtedly exercised a more disorientating effect ideologically than in the West.
How these events, particularly the collapse Stalinism, have affected the consciousness
of of
[page 8]
the masses - of its different layers which draw
different conclusions at different stages - how
it is viewed in the colonial and semi-colonial
world and in the advanced industrial countries,
and above all how consciousness will develop
in the future, is a key question.
World relations encompasses the class balance
of world forces. The collapse of Stalinism does
represent an ideological victory for the bourgeois.
Taken together with the shift to the right at
the tops of the workers' organisations during
the 1980s boom, it complicates the working
class's ability to draw clear Marxist conclusions.
It would be entirely wrong to brush aside the
effects on workers' consciousness of these de-
velopments. Equally it would be false to also
exaggerate their effect. It would leave the most
conscious workers unprepared for the sharp,
abrupt changes that could develop in the im-
mediate period ahead.
The collapse of Stalinism was most keenly
felt in 1989 and 1990, before the onset of the
world economic slowdown. It was possible then
for the strategists of capital to point to the
alleged 'successes' of the market in contrast to
the slothful, dislocated Stalinist societies. However,
events since then, the economic slowdown of
western capitalism and the devastation wreaked
by the attempt to return to the market in the
ex-Stalinist states, has undermined this offensive.
It is true that the tops of the labour movement
and the liberal intelligentsia, under the sway of bourgeois ideas, slavishly worship at the shrine of capitalism. The gist of their argument is that despite all its imperfections capitalism is the only viable system. This is the guiding philosophy not just of the right but also at the present time of the majority of the lefts' in the workers' organisations. They are quite unprepared for the sharp turns in economics, social relations and politics which will be the hallmark of the coming decade.
The outlook of the proletariat is, however entirely different to this layer. In a period of upswing the failure of the planned economies of Eastern Europe and the USSR can be primary, at least in the consciousness of the older layers of the proletariat. The youth, the new layers, as shown by the poll tax struggle in Britain, drew the conclusion that mass movements could overthrow despotic governments. However, even amongst a layer of the youth, the attraction of 'socialism' was dimmed by the collapse of these regimes.
However, ultimately, social conditions determine consciousness. This basic proposition of Marxism is our anchor in the present complicated situation. It is mass unemployment, social deprivation, increasing poverty, which will become primary in the outlook of the proletariat, above all of its new, fresh layers.
The working class can be compelled to go into action in the next period conscious of what it does not want but not clearly comprehending
the alternative. Nevertheless, events would teach
the advanced workers, who will seek out the
necessary historical precedents to develop the
outline of an alternative, even if the organised
forces of Marxism, represented in Britain by
Militant, did not exist.
We should never forget that the basic ideas
of socialism existed in a rudimentary form in
the proletariat - in the French working class
soon after the French revolution, in the English
and in the socialist sects in Germany - even
before Marx or Engels came onto the scene.
Marxism generalised the experience of the
proletariat, summing this up in the ideas of
scientific socialism. Time and experience, the
big events that loom, will be a great teacher
of the working class. Without a conscious mass
Marxist organisation it will undoubtedly take
longer for the proletariat to draw all the necessary
conclusions from its experience. It can take a
circuitous route. But it is already clear that the
pendulum which swung towards the right, pri-
marily at the top of the labour and trade union
movement, is already beginning to swing back
under the pressure of events in the opposite
direction.
The time scale, in the present complicated international situațion, is the most difficult to predict. Yet such is the accumulated bitterness of a broad swathe of the population in the advanced industrial countries, stoked up during the 1980s boom, that mass social eruptions on the scale of May 1968, of Portugal and Greece in 1974, and Italy in the late 1960s and early 1970e dere seopoin, and or the mass
Stalinist parties in western Europe and the colonial and semi-colonial world, has removed an obstacle to the growth of genuine Marxism. The ideas of reformism, which for us are part of the objective situation, can only be overcome by a combination of big events and the work of Marxists within the workers' organisations.
The general conclusion to be drawn from the processes on a world scale is that the future is not one of a revitalised, stabilised epoch of capitalist expansion but an unparallelled period of social upheaval and disturbances. But there is no such thing as a 'final crisis' of capitalism. Without the working class taking power capitalism will always find a way out, albeit on the bones of the working class. Because of the absence of an authoritative Marxist leadership, capitalism's demise will take, as Leon Trotsky pointed out, the form of a drawn-out death agony. However, this will be punctuated by the process of revolution and of counter-revolution. Many opportunities will be presented for linking the ideas of genuine Trotskyism with the mass movement and tablishing for the first time since the Russian revolution genuine mass Marxist forces in all countries of the globe.
March /April 1993 • 7
[page 9]
International Notes
US Labour
N DECEMBER, JUST weeks
after Clinton's election victory, 200 workers gathered in Detroit for a Cleveland and Detroit area conference of the Labour Party Advocates (LPA) organisation.
The conference had been organised to discuss the issues facing the building of the LPA:
the unions relationship to the Democrats, prospects for electoral interventions in 1993 and the historical and international experience of building a working class political organisation.
No speakers had any evidence
US Labor Day demonstration.
of a successful partnership of labour and the Democrats. A rail union leader explained how Edward Kennedy and other Democrat 'friends of labour' had sold them out and warned that the Labour Party Advocates should not become a left cover'
for labour leaders who would talk about a Labour Party but do nothing about it.
In contradiction to LPA's policy against fielding labour candidates, the session on political action illustrated the success of running candidates. The response towards labour experienced in Vermont, West Virginia
8 • March/April 1993
and New Jersey proves what the American Marxist paper Labour Militant has argued, that if Labour had run candidates they would have had an enormous impact during November's election.
In Vermont one-term socialist congressman Bernie Sanders was re-elected with almost two-thirds of all votes. James Gibbs, president of Local 2490 of the United Miners Union, and a working miner, explained how the miners through their own experience saw the Democrats collaborating with the owners during the Pittston strike. UMWA local president Jackie Stump won by three-to-one in a write-in ballot, where some illiterate workers had to painstakingly learn to write his name.
In New Jersey, the Communications Workers . (CWA) threatened to field candidates against the Democrats as a lever in negotiations. One worker failed to take his name off the ballot in time, did no campaigning whatsoever and discovered a day after the election that he'd come within 200 votes of winning!
This is the mood for change that exists today.
Labour Party Advocates still has a policy of not running candidates or having any programme until it reaches 100,000 members. Most likely, therefore, LPA will exist side by side with workers and unions who will be running candidates.
Every small test of the mood has loudly echoed the enormous desire for change in the country. Labour, armed with a socialist alternative, must step up to meet this challenge.
Ireland
entry into a coalition government with Fianna Fail, a special conference of the Irish
Labour Party was held in January in Dublin. The expulsion in 1989 of leading supporters of Militant left a huge vacuum on the left. Only 50 out of the 1,200 present at the conference voted against coalition.
Former left Labour TD (MP) Emmet Stagg 'proudly seconded the motion to coalesce with Fianna Fail.
Former left leader Michael D. Higgins was equally enthusiastic about coalition. He said that the government programme was a great achievement in an era dominated by Reaganism and Thatcherism, criticising those who said that a 'target'
of 3,500 house starts wasn't enough to really affect the housing crisis.
From TDs, the Labour Party Administrative Council, senators and councillors, there was no vocal opposition. The former anti-coalition left completely collapsed, being the most uncritical and enthusiastic advocates of coalition.
Why and how could such a craven collapse of the left take place? The reasons go deeper than the lure of the cabinet positions that some of them were offered. Without a clear programme or understanding of what socialism is, many swallowed the propaganda offensive of the capitalists that, because of the collapse of the Stalinist dictatorships, a genuine socialist movement is unviable. They have wrongly concluded that society cannot be changed, that all you can do is adapt it here and there.
But the mood of the people during the election, and the result which was a defeat for all the parties of the right, showed the thirst for radical solutions to the crisis of unemployment, poverty and the evils that flow from them. This is no longer the era of Reagan
and Thatcher.
[page 10]
The Royal Descent A deep-seated process is gradually undermining the monarchy, argues Dave Cotterill, with important implications for future HE ROYAL FAMILY is beginning to look | institution. like a dilapidated Victorian building which stands alone in the middle of a modern industrial estate. Antiques don't come cheap though. To keep them in the style that they are accustomed to they are asking for a new royal yacht.
So while workers suffer cuts in wages and living standards, the most pampered family in the world hope to be subsidised by a further £80m of taxpayers' money. Instead of spending money on Britain's vital infrastructure, the Tories squander money on a crumbling feudal relic. Such obscenties are not lost on the mass of working people. By its very action royality is undermining its own foundation - reflected in the growing numbers who feel that this institution should be abolished. For over a century and a half Britain was a dominant world power. During this time the institution of the monarchy was hardly ever questioned and neither were the morals or the values that they supposedly stood for. Right up to the 1960s people would stand for God Save the Queen at the end of a cinema film. All classes were drawn around this banner. Since the end of worid war two the situation has reversed. Britain has experienced a dramatic decline in prestige and power, especially through the loss of empire. Paradoxically, the position of the monarchy has not moved in tandem with this economic and social development. If anything, up until the 1980s, the standing of the royals seemed to increase.
It would be a crude caricature of Marxism, however, to equate political developments directly and immediately to underlying economic and social processes. Human consciousness is slow to change and adapt, it lags behind the realities of life. Many, particularly the older generation, have hung on to the old certainties. But in the 1990s the process of dissolution is becoming clear. The old social cement is breaking up. Commentators of the 1986 wedding of Prince Andrew and Sarah Ferguson spoke of a closer knit and more British monarchy with two modern-minded young wives 'which would clear away the last dour Germanic remains of the Hanoverian line'. Princess Di and Fergie may have cleared away the dour look but at the same time they have helped to fatally undermine the whole events.
World historical trends are in the opposite tradition to feudal remnants. In a world where everyone talks of productivity, competitiveness and technique, the monarchy, House of Lords, aristocracy and class privilege are all outmoded institutions.
Who the hell cares about received pronunciation'
or the Queen's English', which is used by a 3% of the mere population.
Street credibility is not The Queen, likely to come facing taxing problems.
through using the slurred allusive nasal whining of the English gentry.
Thatcher's legacy was to try and turn all established institutions upside down. Privatisation was to make everyone accountable to the market. Major followed her with his Citizens Charter. Neither of these short-sighted individuals has the consequences for the monarchy. realised How can you justify an institution which costs £57m a year and is in no way accountable to parliament or the 'people'? If all the other institutions of the establishment are being turned upside down then there is no reason for the monarchy to remain the same.
Social attitudes have undergone a qualitative change - the old ideology is broken down.
A deep-seated process is gradually undermining the monarchy. Social attitudes have undergone March / April 1993 • 9
[page 11]
a qualitative change - the old ideology is broken down. Nowadays the ideal' nuclear family is in a minority, churches are emptying, the national ideology has been weakened with the idea of Scottish independence, and deference to the law is not the same - testified to by non-payment of the poll tax.
Combined with this is the attitude to the monarchy. Increasingly, and especially as royal scandals unfold, a larger proportion of the population are either agnostic or openly opposed to the continuation of the monarchy. A Sunday Mirror poll put this as high as 46%.
The defenders of the faith recognise this seachange in attitudes, which is why they now talk of modernising the monarchy. In other words, disguise the old order by introducing some thoroughly modern methods - like pop music in the church. Such an approach is inherently contradictory. One of the most successful ploys of the ruling class was to maintain the mystique of royalty.
INCE THE 1960s the royals have found
S themselves in a dilemma. Their advisors
have pushed them more into the public light to show that they are not out of touch with their subjects. Daily we have been fer a diet of royal pap. Every women's magazine has for decades carried detailed information on the life of the royals and their hangers-on. It has been a gigantic soap opera that has fixated millions - but for how much longer?
Socialists correctly point to the use of the monarchy as a means of distracting people from every day life. Unconsciously, however, the press and media have undermined the very institution that sells their papers. Over-exposure has created more demand for detail and the examination of warts and all has not shown the royals in a very favourable light.
For the middle classes the institution is what they look to not the individual. But monarchy, as Trotsky pointed out, is by its very nature bound up with the personal, so the spectacle of Prince Charles comparing himself to a Tampax does very little for the individual or the institution!
Modern day communications in a cut-throat world of battles over circulation figures, demands that everyone has to keep up with the latest tit-bit of information. Even now parts of the press are prepared to self-censor to try and protect royalty but in the long run it won't work. Not in a world of cable TV, faxes and trans-Atlantic travel.
even is per cived in cind result im nashyl
assault by an irate monarchist. Nowadays Spitting Image savages the royals and everyone laughs. The defenders of monarchy are increasingly confined to the elderly and the middle classes, especially when the old arguments, that the royal family keeps us all together' and so on,
10 • March/April 1993
have now fallen to bits. After the events of the last three years it seems that the
of the antics younger generation of royals has helped to press the selfdestruct button.
Not that the Queen has been blameless. You really have to be removed from reality to be asking for funds to repair week that Save the a nationwide appeal.
Could we therefore see an end to the monarchy? Most speculation centres around the unlikely succession of Prince Charles, but Labour leaders such as Jack Straw have raised not the abolition of the royals - but reform. Scandinavia is their model - with a 'bicycling monarchy' that exists like any other upper-class family. Already the Queen has agreed to pay tax - the next reform is for all her finances to be made accountable and perhaps an end to the civil list for hangers-on.
But involved in reform of the monarchy are all sorts of other questions. What about the House of Lords or the disestablishment of the Church of England (separating this church from the state) and titles and honours - will they be done away with? Reform will not end the monarchy but it will further weaken the ideology and institution and this could be important in future events.
Edward & Mrs Simpson.
Windsor Castle in Children Fund is
the same launching
CRUDE CARICATURE of Marxist ideas
Aimedice, determing social and pical
immediately determining social and political developments, whereas the real world is a complex reaction and interaction between all of these elements. Consequently the fossilised institutions of royalty, aristocracy, the House of Lords and the church have a material effect on the development of society. They have had their effect on the outlook on the working class, with the ideology of deference and looking up to the royals.
But consider now if the monarchy was to be used as a reserve constitutional weapon in the future - for example as a means of blocking a left-wing Labour government. How would its authority stand up? Or, for example, if a split takes place in the Tory party, as is entirely possible in the future, how would a royalist faction of right-wing Tories develop if the authority of the monarchy had been badly dented?
Some of its authority could be partially regained, especially if the Queen lives to an old age, Charles abdicates and William becomes successor
[page 12]
Baldwin called on George V not to dissolve parliament.
to the crown. But it is hardly likely to return
the royals to the good old days.
Many storms have of course been weathered,
such as the seven day crisis over the abdication of King Edward V111 in 1936. But at that time the press colluded in hushing up events and thirty years of relative stability, progress and rising living standards were a perfect platform for a young Queen to regain the old authority of the monarchy.
All of that has now gone. Events have turned into their opposite, so the royals have to tread very carefully. Any open support for a right-wing grouping would destroy the so-called impartiality that the monarchy rests on. On the other hand the likelihood is that any right-wing split from the Tory party would ransack the old lumber room for the relics of empire and days when Britain was great.
NGELS WROTE IN 1844 that 'in practice,
the power of the crown has been reduced
to naught - all struggle against the crown ceased more than a hundred years ago - yet the British constitution cannot exist without the monarchy... Nowhere... is this non-ruling personification worshipped more than in England the struggle of democracy against the autocracy... is the struggle of the poor against the rich. The democracy towards which England is heading is a social democracy" ". for Engels the social issues were more relevant to the working , class than the pure democratic constitutional issues and only socialism would achieve democratic and social equality.
This was the position taken up by the Marxist movement that developed in the late 1880s. However, the Social Democratic Federation, which often adopted a dogmatic and sectarian approach,
caricatured this position, arguing that it was useless to swop a 'capitalist monarchy for a capitalist republic. Whilst being nominally correct, this crude analysis was to prove opportunist Labour leaders in the 1920s, who quoted it to justify their lack of any opposition to the monarchy.
Engels' analysis in 1844 was a powerful insight into the workings of Britain's constitution. But by the 1880s the material and social conditions were beginning to change. Britain was advancing on the road of a major imperialist power. Prime ministers such as Gladstone looked to refashion the monarchy - pomp and circumstance were needed to enforce the ideology of the ruling class.
It the
is from this period that
idea developed of using
the monarchy as a powerful reserve weapon
It is from this period that the idea developed
of using the monarchy as a powerful reserve
weapon, which retains powers even though they
are seldom used. An emerging labour and trade
union movement formed a powerful challenge to the capitalist class, so it was necessary to create an ideological alternative that would act to overcome class barriers and instead would emphasise a national identity. This the monarchy could fulfil. So whilst The Times at the turn of the century could ponder the merits of a republic - because of the cost of the monarchy - the more far-sighted representatives could see the advantages of a constitutional safeguard to block a radicalised working class moving in the direction of socialism.
Thus the monarchy retained the powers to dissolve parliament, to appoint and dismiss the prime minister, and give the royal assent to all parliamentary bills in order for them to become law. These reserve weapons have been used on three occasions in the 20th century under the banner of a 'constitutional crisis', but in reality reflecting the social and class struggles.
The first occasion was in 1910 when the House of Lords, backed by the King, blocked Lloyd George's Liberal budget which introduced a mild wealth tax, and then took the initiative in pressing for the dissolution of the government. The second occasion was the crisis of the Labour government in 1931. Ramsey Macdonald had been unable to get the Labour cabinet to inflict savage cuts in unemployment benefits. Baldwin, the Tory leader, set to work on King George V, who refused a dissolution of parliament and persuaded Macdonald instead to form a national
March /April 1993 • 11
[page 13]
government.
Such options have not been discounted under modern day conditions. In 1974, with the defeat of the Tories and the return (as it turned out) of a Labour government, The Times raised the possibility of the intervention of the Queen to bring about a Tory-Liberal coalition. Lastly is the example of Australia in 1975 when the Labour government led by Gough Whitlam was bought down by the Australian Governor General acting on the authority of the British monarch.
Britain's unwritten constitution means that in the event of any major political crisis the British monarchy can be wheeled forward with its 'reserve powers. In addition to her own personal powers the Queen can be supported by the 'Privy Council'. This is an archaic and shadowy body. Few constitutional textbooks give any clear indication of its actual or potential powers. The members are all appointed for life and are subject to no democratic control. In practice, it is a small handful of privy councillors who form the inner circle to secretly advise the Queen. Clearly, in a state of emergency it could become an alternative government.
N ITS OPPOSITION to the monarchy Militant
has always emphasised that it is not the
Royal Family as such that is important but the issue of who the monarchy represents and its' constitutional reserve powers that would be used to protect the current system. A thousand and one threads bind the Queen to the capitalist class.
This argument still applies with the same force today. However, the muddle that the monarchy find themselves in reveals a deep-seated crisis that will raise the whole issue of whether or not the monarchy is still needed. Republicanism may become a thriving business.
For many on the left it is a source of amazement that the monarchy has been able to survive for so long. Their immediate explanation
is that British workers are inherently conservative,
and see the royals as a focal point for our national identity.
Leon Trotsky answered this point in his writings on Britain, pointing out that the capitalist class had allowed the restoration of a constitutional monarchy but only on the basis of royalty and the aristocracy adapting themselves to the rule of capital. This conservative but at the same time elastic approach entered not only into the institutions but also into the moral fibre of the ruling class. Thus we had the contradiction of advanced technique combined with feudal relics - something which held back the further development of British capitalism.
All of this was only possible because of the
exceptionally favourable conditions which fell to
Britain in the 1800s for the development of
capitalism on a national basis and then for its further expansion worldwide. "She exploited the
12 • March / April 1993
whole world,"
Trotsky wrote.
This softened the inner contradictions, accumulated conservatism.
.. in the form of the monarchy, House of Lords and the State Church...
"The British bourgeoisie developed under the protection of ancient institutions, on the one hand adopting itself to them, and on the other subjecting them to itself, gradually, organically, in an evolutionary way... In this consists what is called the British tradition... it has gradually adapted the old royal and noble to the requirements of the business firm... And it laid down from above upon its proletariat the heavy lid of cultural conservatism"
Thinking in terms of centuries the capitalist class were easily able to draw in the Labour leaders and corrupt them to their way of thinking.
Fergie's waxwork in the dustbin at Blackpool.
ABOUR SHOULD BE campaigning for the
abolition of the monarchy. But only once
has the issue been debated at the Labour Party conference - in 1923.
Most Labour leaders have paid lip service to criticism of royalty, but normally end up by saying 'they are just ordinary people - like us'. Even Ken Livingstone, after meeting the Queen Mother, commented that 'I have always thought the Queen was a nice person'. Harold Wilson boasted of his great relationship with the Queen and Neil Kinnock enthused after the royal wedding in 1986 that "that smile (of Fergie) was worth all the rest of it".
It is true that personal attacks on the monarchy are not the means to remove them - but on the other hand they are not a triviality. They are not just a family interested in corgis, hunting, horse-racing and talking to plants. Keir Hardie, the founder of the Independent Labour Party, characterised the royals as 'recipients of outdoor relief and stated openly that he could 'not see any use for a royal family.
In an age of mass unemployment, homelessness, inner-city despair and poverty for millions it is obscene that a medieval institution rules over us, squandering money and wallowing in luxury. The riches of the Queen link her directly to the capitalist class, she is the apex of their society. In the age of the computer and micro-chips we have no need for medieval relics. D
[page 14]
Tasks for the unions Decisive action even by a small number of workers, argues Bill Mullins, could in the present situation start off a movement that HUGE SEA change has taken place in result of the pit closure crisis and its aftermath. Large sections of society have taken giant leaps in consciousness to the left. The position of the Tory government has become extremely fragile. Confirmation of this has recently been given, unexpectedly, by John Baker, chief executive of National Power, one of the two privatised electricity generating monopolies. In leaked fidential papers detailing discussions between the government and the generating companies over coal contracts, Baker is quoted as saying to Michael Heseltine that: "matters had come to an extraordinary point if the government saw itself at risk of losing office, of sacrificing the whole of its energy policy and of intending to restructure several of the energy industries, all because of 10.5 million tonnes of coal". (The Guardian, 18 February 1993).
pundits, who after the Tories' general election victory declared that the working class had irrevocably accepted the market, were stunned into silence by the mass ranks of the organised working class as they marched last October through the streets of London behind their union banners.
Arthur Scargill became a national hero. The same gutter press that yesterday vilified him, now lauded him for his 'statesmanlike' role in opposing the shutdown of the pits. The super- " the hits, intendent of the South Yorkshire police who arrested Scargill on the Orgreave picket line in 1984, was wheeled out by The Daily Mirror to say that he was sorry. The Sun, The Mirror, The Mail and the others, that if they realised didn't reflect the overwhelming anger against the Tories in the pages of their papers, they would lose all authority in the eyes of large numbers of their readers.
The Guardian declared that the events were 'national uprising as a small businessman from south east England faxed their letters page calling for a general strike. This gave a glimpse of what Trotsky wrote of in the 1930s, when he said that at certain times it would be the working class that would be seen the real leader of the nation, looked towards for a lead by the middle class and other layers of society.
the TUC would find difficult to control. Yet we had been told by all the smart alecs that the working class was finished. They pointed to the strike figures which by 1990 their lowest recorded levels since records began. In contrast, Militant drew the conclusion that after disappointment on the electoral field the workers would once again be forced to turn to the industrial field.
But still social commentators, from the comfort of their living rooms, talked about how, as a result of the 1980s boom, two thirds of society were better off - and the bottom dispossessed third didn't count as they don't vote anyway'. It is true that a section of skilled workers saw an increase in their living standards, albeit at the cost of their nerves and muscles as the employers speeded up production. But according to the Low Pay Unit, four out of five workers were actually worse off in 1992 than they were 12 years ago.
The crash of the pound on Black Wednesday' was a turning point. With the continuing rise in unemployment, now officially past three million, and the uncertainty for many families over their homes, as six million households have seen the value of their properties plunge, the illusions created by the Tory victory in April were swept away. October saw new layers of workers and youth become involved with the labour movement for the first time in their lives.
UT IF THE fate of the government was Bling freely discussed in comPany board rooms, how is it that the Tories have When Norman Willis met a group of Yorkshire miners in Doncaster he was told that "walking round Hyde Park in the rain while the Tories are sat at home in front of the fire, is not enough. We need a strike".
But the reaction of the TUC bureaucracy from the very beginning was to dampen down any such dangerous developments.
Millions of workers were waiting for the call for action not just for the miners but also for their own jobs.
Militant has articulated this urge for unity in action with the slogan of a 24-hour general strike, not as an end in itself but as a means of mobilising millions of workers March / April 1993 • 13
[page 15]
in an unstoppable force to bring down the | from below on either a local or national level. government.
Under pressure the TUC has called a number of days of action. Unfortunately each time a day of action was announced - such as December 9, January 19 or February 18 - it was accompanied with a health warning from the TUC: a day of action does not include taking strike action' Nonetheless, the pressure on the trade union tops has been enormous. Back in October Derrick Sulthe stephethe dress ungress Souse said "there'll be no more Alamos"
in response the pit closure announcement. By this he meant that the union leaders were not going to take a last-ditch stand in support of the miners. Yet weeks later he was calling on the TUC to organise a series of one-day strikes in the are not doing public sector, stating that "we any service to our members if we carry on marching up and down with banners and banging a drum. We are all under attack and the time has come to co-ordinate action rather than wait for public sector unions to be picked of one NUM TORIES OUT NOTTA ONE DAY GENERAL STRIKE by one". (The Guardian, 21 November 1992). A movement from below always sees the union leadership move to the left, in words at least, as they attempt to keep control of the situation. In 1972 the TUC were forced to announce a 24-hour general strike against the jailing of five London dockers. The same could happen again but only on condition that pressure to the union leaders, whilst at same time union activists prepare for action 14 & March /April 1993 Like Thatcher before him in relation to the poll tax, Major has made a fundamental error in mistaking the attitude of the labour and trade union leadership as the real position of the working class.
The TUC has vacillated from one day to the next in a desperate attempt to free themselves from the pressure of the movement below. They set up an emergency committee to overlook the pit crisis, which has met on a number of occasions since last October. Then the government announced a maximum 1.5% pay limit for the 5.8 million workers in the public sector, three million of whom are in trade unions. At the same time there was a growing tide of announcements of tens of thousands of local authority workers'
job losses, as a result of government cutbacks. This forced the TUC to reconstitute its public services committee. Coupled with the normal general council meetings there was hardly a day went by when members of the TUC not in session.
were All areas of the public sector have come under STRIKE VICTIMS SIMF MOHIDE SACKED MERS AND FAMILIA attack as the Tories desperately try to bring now approaching £50bn a the budget deficit, year, under control. The Tories' are conducting many fronts simultaneously.
their attack on Civil servants face market testing, a prelude their jobs to the contracting out to the lowest bidder. White collar local authority workers' jobs are subject to compulsory competitive tendering. NHS workers see hospitals closing and the opting out of different parts of the NHS.
[page 16]
The crisis in education is a bomb waiting to in particular. explode.
Teachers, for so long treated as professionals, find themselves at the sharp end of government reforms'. These include performance related pay scales and the beginning of the opting out process from local authority control through local management of schools, or LMS. In the nationalised industries privatisation is planned for the railways - dubbed by a Tory critic as a poll tax on wheels - the post office, and even the mines.
The main drive for this is the urgent need for the Tories to cut back on the huge budget deficit. Even the IMF recently 'advised' the government to take 'immediate action'. The Tories' target is one million jobs in the public sector. A mighty battle is pending, but it will depend not just on a willingness to fight back. This is undoubtedly there, as witnessed by the number of local strikes in the public sector. But just as important is the question of leadership. Activists in the public sector unions, with Militant supporters to the fore, have launched a campaign to bring together all these workers under the banner of the public sector alliance. Such is the nature of the political and industrial situation, that decisive action even by a small number of workers could start off a movement that even the TUC would find difficult to control. Inherent within the whole situation in today is the possibility of a 24-hour general strike.
movement around the miners acted as a lightening conductor for all the pent up rage and anger of millions of the organised working class. Now with the longest economic recession since the 1930s seeming to be giving way to a recovery, albeit weak and uneven, this too its effect on the present situation. will have The workers in Yarrow's shipyard in Glasgow, after being told for the fourth successive year that they had to accept a rise below the level of inflation, looked at an order book full until 1997, and came out on strike. Even a slight improvement in the economy, at least as far as production is concerned, will see this repeated many fold.
COMPLICATING FACTOR on the industrial A front has been the collapse of Stalinism worldwide, which has affected the psychology of a leading layer of mainly older workers. It has been this layer that has been thrown back the furthest in consciousness by the events of the past decade. This has had an effect to the extent that a certain thread has been broken with the past militant traditions of the shop floor in the big workplaces. This has been illustrated once again in the Leyland Daf crisis. Major's refusal to intervene in this crisis is indicative of the utter lunacy of a government that represents primarily the interests of the financial establishment, and the City of London to the end The British arm of Leyland Daf, British and Dutch venture, has 26% of the UK market in trucks. Together with its van production, Leyland Daf employs 5,500 in Britain with another 10,000 jobs in the supply industry. It contributes f2bn to the balance of trade, exporting 50% of its production. Even the Dutch government the need to maintain some sort of recognised manufacturing base, putting up £83m for restructuring of the Dutch and Belgium plants. Never slow to miss a chance Iveco, a joint Ford/Fiat truck-maker, and Mercedes Benz, the leading European lorry producer, took out full page adverts in the British press. Iveco boasted that it was investing £2.5bn for a new range of trucks, pointedly remarking that this was private investment.
The Leyland Daf crisis found the shop floor without a leadership. The convenors and shop stewards threw up their hands and said we can do nothing. In the van factory in Birmingham the situation has been reached where the receivers were able to select out from the workforce who they wanted to make redundant.
Significantly, not one of the 600 workers chosen for redundancy out of a workforce of 2,000, was a shop steward. Only those who were deemed as potential troublemakers were sacked The overwhelming mood was for an occupation. But the workers found themselves up against the union as well as the receiver. If an occupation had taken place it would have been a beacon to workers everywhere.
If an occupation had taken place in any of the three Leyland factories in Britain it would have been a beacon to workers in struggle everywhere. Like the occupation of Upper Clyde Shipbuilders (UCS) in 1972, it could have mobilised the support of tens of thousands of workers. In fact the response would have gone much further than UCS, such is the charged political and industrial atmosphere that now exists in British society.
It could have turned into a regional general strike.
Such developments are inherent in the situation. These future battles will throw up a completely new layer of shop floor leaders with no illusions, prepared to go much further than the older generation, although such will be the pressure of events that also many of the older generation will be brought back into activity. And as that movement develops Militant will play a central part in building a leadership prepared to struggle March /April 1993 • 15