The Socialist Party and reforms (1977)

From the October 1977 issue of the Socialist Standard

We have been asked to clarify two recent statements in the Socialist Standard. An article in the May issue (page 94) said: “A revolutionary party is committed exclusively to revolution and cannot support reforms— which are anti-revolutionary.” An article in August (page 156) began: “The case of the SPGB against reforms is based on the fact that reforms of all kinds involve the working class in political action which is detrimental to the cause of Socialism.”

These statements are correct, but some expansion of them is required. The SPGB has a single policy, laid down in our Object and Declaration of Principles: the political organization of the working class for the establishment of Socialism. We oppose other political parties because they are committed either to maintaining capitalism and seeking to clear up problems by reform, or to the mistaken idea that reforms can radically alter it. This is reformism; belief in it keeps the workers from recognizing that they can only be emancipated by Socialism, and the SPGB does everything it can to dispel that belief.

We do not advocate reforms of any kind, or support proposals for them. Reforms can only be enacted by those who control the machinery of government. If we pursued the line that a particular reform would be beneficial, we should have to give electoral support to one of the parties of capitalism in the hope that they would enact it—thereby helping into power the enemies of the working class and Socialism. This is underlined by the fact that some “useful” legislation has been the work of Tory governments, including the Reform Act of 1867, the trade union Acts of 1875 and 1876 and the first Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1897; while the social security Acts were produced jointly by Tories, Liberal and Labour.

The SPGB condemns many reforms on specific grounds. In other cases we do not dispute that legislation which serves capitalist needs also benefits the working class, and that some measures have provided weapons in the class struggle for the workers and the Socialist movement. This does not modify our attitude to policies of reform. Such measures have frequently been brought forward by the capitalists themselves to meet economic developments. When support is canvassed for a proposal by a reformist party, its basis is a statement of intentions. A realistic judgement can only be formed on the complete measure—and perhaps by seeing to what extent the capitalists can get round it.

If there were a Socialist minority in Parliament or a local council, it would be able to view finished legislative proposals and assess their advantages or otherwise. But the criterion for an advantage has always been clearly stated by us: it would be the measure’s relationship to the achieving of Socialism.