The leading article in the December issue of the Socialist Standard has been replied to—in a way.
On Christmas eve, when thoughts were turned to wishing Peace on Earth and Goodwill to All Men, the author of that article met Messrs. Williams and Greenwood. Williams said nothing— Greenwood said much.
He assured me he had read my “mean, contemptible, despicable article” in my “dirty little rag,” and proceeded to give his opinion of the Party in general and me in particular. This opinion was not very flattering nor couched in particularly elegant language, and I suggested that when he had quite exhausted his vocabulary of abusive terms he might attempt to refute the statements in the article, or even argue the points mentioned. He assured me, with much gesticulation, that the only way he would argue with me would be to take me by the throat and strangle the life out of me. But as this would still have left the points of difference in dispute the offer was not accepted.
Then I was subjected to a further denunciation for “belittling men who had made such sacrifices for the movement.” The Communist Manifesto states “the proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains ; they have a world to win.” And as I presume you cannot sacrifice what you never had, I disagree with his remarks about sacrifices.
But he didn’t mind my theorising on the question of unemployment; what he objected to was my way of imputing dishonesty to them. I replied that if they could square their method of organising the unemployed with the principles of Socialism I should be glad to hear it. Again he expressed his desire to punch my head, but Ludgate Circus at 2 o’c in the afternoon did not offer a good opportunity, so that his discretion supplanted his valour (!). True, he invited me to “bring up my pals” after the punching process, but the invitation was declined. His parting shot was that he was of the opinion that I was not a Socialist but a paid agent of the Tory Party ! This after waxing wrathfully eloquent over my “insinuations.”
It is doubtful whether the incident is worth much attention. The anger of Mr. Greenwood clearly shows he has no case and knows it; and, personally, I regret that he should have so far descended as to make a fool and a blackguard of himself. To bystanders, hearing a man raving in the name of Socialism does not reflect any credit on it, and when he wants to strangle an opponent and go to other absurd lengths to manifest disagreement they are still less likely to be attracted to the movement. If I had said anything in my article which was incorrect, it was, and is, open to Mr. Greenwood or any other to write to the editor explaining the error, and demanding a withdrawal. For my part, I am certain that the mere receipt of a decently courteous expression of disapproval would do more to alter my opinion than all the abuse and the threats which even Mr. Greenwood is capable of.
I trust that his attitude is not typical of his organisation on this matter of argument, because if questions in dispute are to be settled by an appeal to physical force, the S.D.F. would be proved wrong by the powers that be, as would any opinion that happened to be in the minority, and I cannot believe that the man with the stronger arm is always more correct than the weaker one, any more than Mr. Greenwood’s greater size and strength would infallibly prove the incorrectness of the position of—
R. H. Kent.
I couldn't find any details about Greenwood the aggressor but Jack Williams was a well-known and well-regarded member of the SDF going back decades. He was one of the two SDF parliamentary candidates at the 1885 General Election (part of the 'Tory Gold' scandal).
ReplyDeleteHyndman wrote the following about Williams in his 1911 memoir, 'The Record of an Adventurous Life':
It is impossible not to compare such a career as that of Williams with Burns’. There is no man in the movement at home or abroad who has done more for his class, and for the most hopeless and miserable of that class than J.E. Williams. He was a Socialist before any of us and here to-day, after forty years of continuous agitation, under most trying conditions, he remains the energetic, self-sacrificing, indefatigable agitator that he was when he began; though, except in the general progress of our ideas, he has had little indeed to encourage him in his splendid work. Even we Social Democrats ourselves scarcely appreciate Jack Williams at his real worth, or at all times fully comprehend the dignity and greatness of this indefatigable little figure. Born of the proletariat, living with the proletariat, fighting for the proletariat, suffering for the proletariat, when he too could, quite as easily as Burns, have made a good and easy position for himself by turning against the men and women from whom he sprang. It has been quite wonderful. Never an agitation, never a strike, never an open-air debate in this metropolis, nor indeed anywhere throughout the country where his service could be useful, but Jack Williams has been well to the front. Always vigorous, always cheery, always ready to do the hardest and least advertised work, Jack Williams is to me a constant cause for amazement and. admiration.
Nor let any one imagine for a moment that Williams is ignorant, or cannot hold his own with the men of the class above him. There is not a single speaker in the whole Labour Party in the House of Commons whom I would rather trust than John Williams to uphold the cause of Socialism before an educated audience as a representative of his class. More than a quarter of a century ago Mr. Arnold White, now “Vanoc” of the Referee, challenged the Social-Democratic Federation to debate Socialism with him, or the Social-Democratic Federation challenged Mr. Arnold White, I forget which. In any case an arrangement was come to by which a set debate was to be held in the Hall attached to the Rev. G.S. Reaney’s Congregational Church at the East End. Williams spoke first and when, during Mr. Arnold White’s reply, I saw he was taking no notes at all I sent him a slip of paper begging him to do so; he read it through and merely shook his head. Yet when it came to his turn to answer he never missed a point, and Mr. White himself generously admitted afterwards that not only was he amazed at the extent of Williams’s knowledge and his readiness, but that he considered our little champion got the best of it. That was the general opinion. When I reflect upon the hard exhausting work that Jack Williams has done since then, for practically no remuneration, though he had only to trim a little in order to be well paid, I take off my hat to him as one of the noblest men who ever fought under the Red Flag.