Towards a republican socialist alternative platform

‘Neither Labourism nor Trotskyism” was the conclusion from the first article calling for an Alternative to the Left Party Platform and the Socialist Platform. These Platforms do not identify key questions which Left Unity must answer if it is to succeed. We have to learn from previous failures (SLP, SA, SSP, Respect and TUSC) not by ignoring them and pretending they never happened. We have to answer questions about what kind of unity and party, how to address the disunity with socialists on the Labour left and in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. We have to have a new ideology which deals with political-constitutional questions and the divide between reform and revolution. Finally there is the political timing of the launch and name of the party.

The key points of the first article are summarised as follows:

1. The two main platforms on offer are not satisfactory and so we need an alternative.

2.  The left needs to get a move on but we should not launch a party prematurely without solid foundations.

3. The left has spent 15 years getting it wrong. We cannot have another failure. We must identify previous mistakes and show how we can correct them.

4. What kind of left unity are we talking about – radical unity, socialist unity or Marxist unity?

5. A new party needs a new ideology, neither Labourism nor Trotskyism

6. A new party must deal seriously with the Labour left and the national question

7. We must end the British road to socialism and come up with an alternative

8. The new party must address the failure or crisis of democracy

9. We need a better name than Lefty Party

There were supportive comments from a few comrades including Geoff Gay who saw the article as “the sort of carefully thought-out piece that we need in the run-up to November 30th. It asks most of the necessary and important questions and has a good stab at pointing the way forward”. With the help from comments on the Left Unity site, the IS Network site and from supporters of the Republican Socialist Alliance I will try to take the argument forward.

The Socialist Unity Party

Is Left Unity about radical, socialist or Marxist-communist unity? The question remains unanswered by supporters of the other platforms. Our statement stood clearly for Left Unity identifying itself as a Socialist Unity Party, seeking to unite social democrats and communists into one party. This would be an historic break with the whole British tradition in which liberals and social democrats organised in one Labour party and communists organised in a separate party.

Geoff G says “there is not necessarily a clear dividing line between democratic socialists and communists”. I agree. I was not concerned to draw that line or define who is a True communist or Real social democrat. There are times when a sharper distinction might be necessary but when promoting unity it would be a diversion.

Nick H agreed on the need for clarity on the unity question. He says “Thanks for a very thoughtful and helpful article. I was particularly struck by the definition of ‘radical unity’ – I must admit I thought that this was what Left Unity was intended to be but clearly some of the platforms do not envisage this”. Many comrades, like Nick, might be led to believe Left Unity means one thing only to find out it means something else. There is no unity in ambiguity.

On the unity question the Left Party Platform (“a broadly-based new party of the left”) and the Socialist Platform (“socialist party”) are at best ambiguous and at worst manipulative. These platforms must make their positions absolutely clear. It was reported in Weekly Worker that divisions or cracks had already appeared in the ranks of the Socialist Platform. Some Marxists tried to amend the Platform so it would be unequivocally identified as a revolutionary Marxist platform and others preferred to continue with ambiguity.

The Republican Party  

The next questions on ideology and the constitutional politics can be brought together, as comrades from the RSA pointed out, under the heading of the republican question. Obviously this is a constitutional matter because a republic implies a party standing against the existing UK constitution. But republicanism is not simply about the constitution, it stands for the ideas of democracy, popular sovereignty and people power. It is an ideological question which raises fundamental questions about power, law and the state.

The British left is generally anti-monarchist but does not engage in struggle for a republic. The left knows what it is against but is not sure what it is for and hasn’t a clue about how to fight for it. Its ideological stand point is confused. This is hardly surprising in a country in which constitutional monarchy is the official theory of democracy and the national ideology of the state and government.

A republic will come when there is a party and class determined to fight for it. As historian Dorothy Thompson pointed out there is no republican party in England or for the matter Scotland and Wales – at least not since 1649. Marxists will conclude that ‘no party’ means there is no class determined to abolish the Crown and create a people’s democracy. Of course the upper classes and the middle class have a stake in the political regime crowned for their glory. The working class is incorporated into regime through Labourism either as Her Majesty’s government or loyal opposition.

On the Left Unity site republican ideas were found only in comments by Mark Antony France. He agreed with the “stress on the importance of Constitutional matters”. He proposed a “new English Party – Peoples United”, whose aim was “To win popular mass support for the creation of a Green and Pleasant Socialist Republic in England”. However republicanism is not just an idea about democratic aims but about the means of getting there.

The “British Road” and the “Republican Road”.

In passing I made a throw away comment about ending the British Road to Socialism. Geoff G says “As an old CPGB-er, I would argue that we can still learn from at least some of the ideas in THE “British Road to Socialism”, the CPGB’s programme, especially the concept of the Broad Democratic Alliance. Rather than “the end of the BRS, I think we need a NEW BRS”.

The British Road was an immensely significant programme for the British Left not simply for the CPGB. I think it was an expression of Labourism even before the CPGB theorized it and gave it a specific brand name. The brand name is now with the Morning Star. However its influence on the left is much wider and deeper. Consequently despite the end of the CPGB the ‘British Road’ still exists as a subconscious drive built into the DNA of the left.

Left Unity has no strategy which means that it too is on the ‘British Road’ by default. This goes back to my point that creating a real party takes time. At least with the CPGB you knew what road it was on. It had a medium to long term strategic plan which could be criticized. It is more difficult to criticize the non-plan of Left Unity unless we recognise it is on the default road to socialism.

To build a genuinely new party and not a rehash of the previous ones we have to end the British Road to socialism. This does not mean abolish all strategy or avoid the tricky issue of how to get from today to a future social transformation. On the contrary the British Road only ends when we or Left Unity finds an alternative. In a certain sense we need a ‘new’ or ‘alternative’ ‘British’ road or may be a road which is not British. In Scotland some are already speaking in terms of a ‘Scottish road’ or an ‘end of Britain Road’.

If Left Unity is to become a serious party it has to have a strategy. If it doesn’t then as soon as the cannon shells start landing it will shatter like match wood. Without a strategy or ‘road map’ Left Unity will simply be reactive to this or that matter thrown up in its path. In essence it will be defensive. But a real party needs a plan of attack with medium term or intermediate objectives. Then Left Unity can lose election battle and still make progress. An election campaign is not an end in itself but an opportunity to convince workers not only of Left Unity aims but that it has a plan about how to get there.

The republican road to socialism has been suggested as an alternative. This needs thinking about. It would be a strategy breaking from “Britishness” and focusing instead on the struggle for democracy and constitutional political change. This would not necessarily contradict some aspects of the British Road which Geoff recommends such as the “Broad Democratic Alliance”. But a “Broad Democratic Republican Alliance” would not be as broad. It would exclude the royalist bourgeoisie represented by the Tories, Liberal Democrats and the right wing of the Labour Party. It would however include the Green Party and the Labour Left and make possible a re-engagement with the left in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales.

Reform versus Revolution

Geoff G says these should not to counter-poised. I agree, but unfortunately many on the ultra left pose it like this. It is an argument that needs to be recognised and taken on. The interplay is more complex than simple opposition. Reform can lead to revolution and revolution can lead to reform. It would be better to distinguish between reform and ‘reformism’ as a particular theory of reform.  The Chartists were a party of democratic reform which contained a ‘reformist’ and ‘revolutionary’ wing. It is not simply that the Labour Party calls for reforms, many of which have been reactionary, but that its ideology is reformist and hence committed to upholding the constitutional laws of the country.

The Disunity Question

The Labour left and the socialist movements in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are currently outside Left Unity. Geoff G added a reminder of the importance of the Green Party. So how will Left Unity relate to these rival but parallel organizations? It takes us back to the question of strategy.

Name of the Party question

We asked if Left Party was a good name. Mark Antony France says that liked “the idea of Anti UKIP” meaning ‘Anti-UK constitution internationalist Party’. The idea of an ‘Anti-Constitution Socialist Party’ or a ‘New Constitution Socialist Party’ got the thumbs down from comrade John P. I promised I would try to come up with something snappier. Some RSA comrades suggested we try “Republican Socialist Party” on the grounds it was short and sweet and relatively understandable. It says we aim to do what it says on the tin!