Letter: ". . . a helluva lot of grey in between" (1982)

Letter to the Editors from the September 1982 issue of the Socialist Standard

Dear Editors,

The sentiments of Mike Scott (Letters. June) are broadly mine. Your reply shows that we differ only about means. You support my trade union efforts to improve my position as a wage earner but not my efforts to (say) improve local housing and health care for my neighbours at the expense of (say) bigger and better bombs.

Maybe the only consistent action for socialism is work to persuade fellow workers to agree with us about our final goal but in the meantime, for some of us, there is an obligation to house the homeless, feed the hungry and care for the sick.

I am not advocating a form of modified capitalism by trying to alleviate some of its effects on me and my fellows. Politics is like religion — black and white at the ends and a helluva lot of grey in between.

Having read your excellent journal for some time now I feel the SPGB is about as effective as "Captain Anarchy”, whose story was ironically on the same page as the letter referred to above.

Reg Holmes 

Hounslow, Middlesex

Reply:

Many of the Socialist Party’s permanent sympathisers believe that working for "something now" is the only course of action for politically committed workers since socialism, desirable as it is. remains a distant prospect. While they get stuck into feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, fighting for jobs, banning the bomb, expanding health services and improving everything else in sight socialists, it is said, spend their time merely talking about social change. When we get up front our armchairs, knock on the table and ask "Is anybody there?", thousands of voices reply: "Yes, Reg Holmes. I'm with you in spirit but tied up in the day-to-day struggle".

In reality, of course, these people generally display about as much understanding of the workings of capitalism as does Mr. Holmes. Far from differing with us only about means, they singularly fail to grasp the essence of our case: that any real diminution of the worst effects of capitalism cannot be achieved while the system itself remains intact. They prefer to believe, in face of their experience and overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that resources set aside for destruction can somehow be channelled into areas of human need and major social problems successfully tackled piecemeal.

Socialists are not impervious to the sufferings of workers under capitalism or dismissive of their attempts to alleviate it by individual action. We simply point out that this will leave the cause of the problems untouched and socialism no nearer. The irony of Mr. Holmes’ letter is that it is precisely because so many workers share his approach to politics that capitalism continues and socialist propaganda is comparatively ineffective. If, at the end of his life. Mr. Holmes looks back at his endeavours and sees that nothing much has changed it will be no comfort to us. We will still have to convince workers of the urgent need to deal now with causes rather than effects.

Editors.