recent disaster.
JOHN LASZLO, London ‹eerr r into the elections, attempting to Parliament against repression, RAY CHALLINOR, in his attack on Hilary Wainwright (Letters 10 April) epitomises many of the points which Hilary makes about WCSVC OuIC CoulOIrICL She is accused of being deficient in her understanding of Marxist polities to the point of utter ignorance. aisne da deen active in the socialist movement ior some years ana nas thu: presumably encountered theory and accumulated experience is cvaculy ui lo accoull Having "smashed' Hilary by asserting her ignorance (thereby removi uc nilo cule political debate and asserting his own infallibility) Ray then recounts a sordid tale of intrigue •from Newcastle Socialist Centre This is a case of substituting for taking up Hilary politically wozz c e racen authors actually say? They make two central points. First, there is a ceran sve or debate an practice in the organised left. The hard, erect, self-contained revolunonary ( tae exie )... A tendency to polarise debate, the demand that one's opponents present complete arguments and so on . Second, that this flows froll scunst cucury allc organisation On the first point. Most of us are probably familiar with the voe eenoa conoe o eats, sleeps and breathes political activity. In some ways these comrades are the backbone of the revolutionary left. But they set standards which many comrades mine lt naru to mccl ol llalcid reasons; working hours, personal relationships, children etc I've no doubt that many of u: are familiar with the style of debate already mentioned. Only Loo ouen ocone ncw to boruc just clam up and listen; they feel intimidated and afraid they will oe smashed.
To the second point: that these phenomena derive from Leninist orsallsalul , 1 think that thi. accusation is basea on a misunderstanding of Leninism.
Democratic centralism •resuodoses mor omv centralisee practice but also the intake of The practices caes cuc mennonea in tnis letter cul acros. this intake — they are not Leninist practices •n ner crone sHary polemicising against a caricature of Leninism - but a caricature wich Is orten presented as tne real thing.
Lenin and Trotsky consistently mme o æo o c masses; 'leadership' is gained through participating in the mass nOvenel cuadaoye with the masses. The 'Fragments' current is tilting at a caricature. • DUL IL IS LILIC W sluyu caricaturing them!