Letter: A malicious attack? (1995)

Letter to the Editors from the June 1995 issue of the Socialist Standard

Dear Editors,

There must have been a page missing from April's Socialist Standard. When I came to read the review of Strike Back by Ernie Roberts, what I found was an extensive review of pp. 32-33 and a malicious attack on E. Roberts.

So a mistake was made (has it been pointed out to the publisher?) Is Roberts the first person to make a factual error in a book? I think not. The venom in the review made me think that Roberts was guilty of a crime against humanity, rather than a simple error. Although I disagree with Roberts's tactics over the years, he has done some good work in the trades unions and in fighting fascism. So when are we going to have a proper review, by a more rational reviewer?

Wayne Holmes,

Neath, Glamorgan

Reply:

Alright, so it wasn't a proper review but it wasn’t that bad. We never said Ernie Roberts was not a good trade unionist nor that he was not a good anti-racist. By all accounts he was both of these. We criticised him for helping to spread the lie that the SPGB is anti-union and for being a loyal supporter of state-capitalist Russia. We feel we are entitled to be annoyed about this since the thousand or so militant trade unionists and political activists who will read his book will go away with a completely false idea of our attitude to trade union action, and may be put off from taking us seriously as a result, without us being able to do anything about it.

Editors.