Notes of the Month: Labour Party Problems (1935)

The Notes of the Month column from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Labour Party Problems

 

Whilst the Labour Party has officially declared for sanctions against Italy should the latter carry out its threat of attacking Abyssinia, this attitude has met with disapproval from many of its own members, including several prominent officials. Mr. Lansbury has threatened to resign his position as Leader because the application of sanctions may involve the use of armed force. He is now opposed to all wars, because "they are against the teachings of Christianity.” He has now evolved a plan which will, in his opinion, put an end to all possibilities of wars in the future. This is nothing less than the “sharing of all the raw materials, markets and unoccupied territory of the world.” He wants the League of Nations to appoint a commission of economic and scientific experts to draw up a scheme for carrying out these proposals.” They could quite easily tell us how to meet the insistent demands of Italy, Germany and other nations for expansion, and how to pool natural resources, develop the markets, and satisfy the demands of the millions of people starving and sick in Asia, Africa and Europe.” (Daily Herald, September 16th, 1935. Italics ours.)

That Mr. Lansbury can hope that the present owners of territory, mineral resources, etc., will relinquish or share their property unless forced to do so is sheer madness. That he expects such a scheme, even if carried out to “satisfy the demands of the sick and starving millions,” is equally illusory. The “sick and starving millions” are the propertyless workers and peasants, and they are as much a feature of the countries already in possession of raw materials, territory and markets such as Britain, France and the U.S.A. as they are of Germany, Italy Abyssinia, or any other country. The world now belongs to the capitalists and not to the workers, and if it is parcelled out in different proportions or pooled among the present owners, how can that benefit the proletariat?

* * *

 

“Pious ” Enemy No. 2.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is also a Christian. Nevertheless, he can foresee circumstances in which a war may become “Christian." In his broadcast on September 1st he made it clear that, in his opinion, a war fought with the blessing of the League of Nations had also the blessing of the Church. We would add that history does not tell us of many wars in which the Church has withheld its “blessing.”

* * *

Where Does he Stand?

Sir Stafford Cripps is the Chairman of the Socialist League, an organisation affiliated to the Labour Party. He is opposed to Labour’s policy of sanctions, and does not agree with its support of the League of Nations. In an article in the Sunday Referee (September 15th, 1935), entitled ”Where I Stand,” he says: “While capitalism controls our national, and imperialism our international life, the actions of our Government will be determined by capitalist and imperialist interests.” Correct, Sir Stafford, but how do you square that statement with your membership of the Labour Party, which plainly holds the opposite point of view?

* * *

United Front at Last

The Communists seem to have achieved their hearts' desire, that much-sought-after "United Front." And it is of a magnitude that must exceed their most sanguine hopes. For on the Italian-Abyssinian dispute they are solidly behind the National Government (or should we say in front of them?). "The League's Covenant must be upheld by all means at our disposal," declared Sir Samuel Hoare, British Foreign Minister, in a speech at Geneva. And he has the solid support of the bulk of the Labour Party, the whole of the Liberal Party, and most certainly the Communist Party, who have issued impressive-looking proclamations, urging the public to support the League. As their sponsors at Moscow are now members of the League this is not surprising. But their attempts to explain their "policy" are ludicrous. Lenin's condemnation of the League as a “Thieves' Kitchen" still holds good with us, though the disciples of Lenin grace its functions. And what has become of their erstwhile boast, to "turn every imperialist war into a civil war " ?

* * *

Where we Stand

"The people who do not own a country and its resources have nothing to fight for excepting Socialism "! That is our policy. The workers of Abyssinia, many of whom are still chattel-slaves, should not be inveigled into fighting for the property of Abyssinian princes. The workers of Italy have nothing to gain by fighting to secure more territory and raw materials for their masters. And the business of the workers the world over is not to take sides with either of the two Governments, or any other Government or League of Governments. Their business is to take the world out of the hands of the present owners and make it the possession of all. That is not the attitude of any other political party in this country.

* * *

Another Mining Disaster

Seventeen miners died as a result of an explosion in a coal mine near Barnsley (Yorks.) on September 12th. There have now been three big mining disasters this year, all claiming a heavy toll of life. These tragedies emphasise the conditions of workers who, for a pittance of less than £2 per week, have to risk their lives. And we often have to answer questions like: "Do not the capitalists have to risk their money in order to make a profit?" The miners are now preparing to struggle for an increase in their wages. Whilst we commend such struggles, we must at the same time point out that such a struggle, even if successful, will only mean a few more shillings a week. And we ask you miners: "How can you be satisfied with that when, by organising into the S.P.G.B., you can help obtain the Means of Life, including the mines, for society as a whole." Then the risk to human life would be lessened and, in return for less arduous and unpleasant work, all the comforts of life would be yours.

* * *

A “ Corrective ” for Capitalism

"Capitalism is your servant and must never be your master—but it must be treated fairly. When it goes wrong, as it has gone wrong, it must be corrected." (Mr. Bennett, Canadian Premier, Daily Herald, September 13th, 1935.) We propose that the working class makes itself "master" of the political machine, and then administer one stroke—the appropriation of the land, factories, means of transport, etc., in the name of society.

* * *

“Men of Action ” at Work

The German "Men of Action," Hitler and Co., assembled at Nuremberg, where the German Reichstag was called to deal with problems alleged to be of vital importance to the German workers. General Goering presented the first Bill, which provides that the Swastika flag shall become the State flag of Germany. Thus a tremendous victory was won for the German working population! Further evidence of the Nazi Government's concern for the conditions of the German workers was shown by the following new laws (Daily Herald, September 16th): —

For the protection of the German blood and honour, this law forbids the marriage between Jews and Germans or related lines.

Jews cannot hire German maid's in their household under the age of 45.

The joy of German working people should be boundless. How different from Socialists, who are merely concerned with the solution of the problem of poverty!

* * *

Without Trimmings

The agenda of the Labour Party Conference, held at Brighton this month, contains several interesting items. A resolution submitted by the Southport Trades Council and Labour Party reads as follows: "That the next General Election be fought without trimmings, on the policy outlined at the Southport Conference, under the title of ‘For Socialism and Peace,' special stress being laid upon:—

1. The immediate nationalisation of the land and all minerals.
2. The immediate establishment of a 40-hour week, with no reduction in economic circumstances.
3. The immediate raising of the school-leaving age to 15 years, with full maintenance during the last year at school.
4. General retirement from industry at the age of 60, with pension, such pension to be raised to £1 per week for a single person and £2 per week for married couples.

“ It is urged that this general and specific policy be a ‘Stand or Fall' programme, and declares that it is the lowest minimum of policy as Socialists this Conference is prepared to tolerate.”

So now you can “stand or fall” for “Socialism and Peace” with or without “trimmings”—and get “trimmed". 

A further resolution submitted by the Warrington T.C. and L.P. reads as follows: —

“That this Conference, believing that there is a limit to the possibility of Social Reform legislation within the capitalist system, and realising definitely that the Labour Movement of this country has declared for a Socialist policy, agrees that the Movement should centre the whole of its propaganda and educational activities on making Socialism and Socialist Policy its only objective” 

”The Conference further declares that the concentration of the Party on the support of the policy of doles and palliatives has become inimical to its Socialist objective, and that the next Labour Government should set out immediately to adopt such Socialist measures as will render such doles and palliatives unnecessary.”

Everything depends upon what the people at Warrington mean by “Socialism” and "Socialist measures.” But if they mean to change the Labour Party from a reformist organisation to a Socialist one their task is hopeless. The bulk of the Labour Party membership is not Socialist, and the job of converting them cannot be done from within. And why trouble to change the Labour Party if there is already a party in existence whose only objective is Socialism, namely, the S.P.G.B.

Labour Party headquarters have shown what they think of the above resolutions by putting it at the tail-end of the agenda, under the heading of “Miscellaneous.”

* * *

S.P.G.B. and the B.B.C.

Last year we approached the B.B.C. with a view to obtaining permission to put our case over the radio. We received a polite letter, informing us that arrangements had already been made for a representative of “Left-Wing Socialism” to broadcast. As we are not “Left-Wing,” but Socialists, as, in fact, we belong to “no wing” of the Reformist Movement we repudiated the right of anyone to speak on our behalf, unless appointed by ourselves. Now we have again approached the B.B.C. and hope that these gentlemen will grant us the privilege that has not been denied to the other political organisations. If and when we get our turn we hope to be able to make it quite clear to the listeners that as the S.P.G.B. is the only party in this country that does not recruit support on questions of day-to-day legislation under capitalism but gets its backing solely on the issue of Socialism versus Capitalism, we have nothing in common with those who, calling themselves “Socialists,” are, in fact, nothing of the kind. Scientific, revolutionary Socialism in Great Britain is represented by the S.P.G.B.

Sid Rubin