Marxism
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: The Problem--New tack: "Reformism" vs "Reform"
- Subject: Re: The Problem--New tack: "Reformism" vs "Reform"
- From: Adam Rose <adam@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jan 96 13:08:20 GMT
Louis is right to say that we shouldn't make silly predictions
along the lines of "the revolution will occur in 1985". We can
only predict that the struggle will continue. We can make other
predictions along the lines of "In a period of crisis there
will be large scale workers struggles". However, no one
predicted the precise timing and nature of the recent struggles
in France, or for that matter, the events of 1936 or 68.
However, I think the statement "Revolutionaries are the best
Reformists" is true.
In Britain, the 1945-51 Labour government introduced wide ranging
reforms which socialists are now defending against government
attacks. However, the ruling class as a whole saw that they had
to give these reforms. As the Tory Lord Hailsham said "either we
give the people reform or they give us revolution". It was the net
result of the radicalisation and class struggles during the war
that brought about the reforms. During the war, Labour had become
incorporated into the state and tried to sabotage or imprison the
leaders of (illegal) strikes. As far as revolutionaries had any
influence, they used it to further these strikes ( and munitinies ).
The revolutionaries acted in such a way as to make reform more likely,
the reformists in such a way as to prevent it.
If you are a reformist, you start from what the system can afford.
At the beginning of the post war boom, it could afford reforms. Now
it can only afford cuts. This is reflected on the right and left of
the Labour Party. Previous Labour oppositions have promised reforms
and given us cuts. Blair has promised nothing and will give us deeper
cuts. But on the left, the Labour councils, run by the Labour Left, are
already giving us cuts, and will continue to do so under Blair. The
reformists are attacking their own reforms.
In this situation, it is revolutionaries, ie people who start from human
needs not the requirements of profit, who lead the fight for reforms, or,
more precisely, to keep what we've already got, in opposition to the
reformists. This is the case in local government against Labour councils
and in the health service against central government.
Of course, most workers most of the time have reformist ideas in their
heads and identify with reformist politics in general. However, the
success of any struggle depends on the extent to which large numbers
of workers can be won away from reformism over this particular issue,
and this in turn depends on the size of the minority that have been won away
from reformism in general.
Adam.
Adam Rose
SWP
Manchester
UK
---------------------------------------------------------------
--- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
------------------
- Thread context:
- More US cops of the world shit,
Scott Marshall Tue 09 Jan 1996, 04:48 GMT
- Re: marxism-digest V2 #397,
hazel blunden Tue 09 Jan 1996, 03:41 GMT
- Re: The Problem--New tack: "Reformism" vs "Reform",
Carrol Cox Tue 09 Jan 1996, 03:27 GMT
- Spanish, German and French Web Browser,
Scott Marshall Tue 09 Jan 1996, 01:29 GMT
- NOT A PERSON NOR A PENNY FOR THE BOSSES' WARS,
Mauro junior Tue 09 Jan 1996, 00:49 GMT
- Re: La situation de classe des inseignants,
Mauro junior Tue 09 Jan 1996, 00:49 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]