THE WORKERS' SOCIALIST LEAGUE has forspecial supplement to its theoretical journal Workers Socialist Review. prominent in the weekly The WSL's views Labour Party newspaper Socialist Organiser. DurSocialist Organiser FOr self-determination the Malvinas (Falkland)
against baigned vigorously against British involvement hespecial WL conference This was overturned at on 5 September, which agreed by a narrow 2 percent majority to 'change our line to Argentine defencism', after tendency tour-monen struggle. Slogan The new majority plains its thus:
selfThe SIUELLE determination is irrelevant and misleading... Were it not for their hostility to the nearby Argentinian people hostilty stoked up by 150 years of excluLatin American 3101E people propaganda, MOSE recently by the Argentine invasion the most obtion would be for the islanders develop people and economy, fighting for full rights as a self-governing part of Argentina.
Instead they remain as an isolated and backward colonial enclave, cut off from any serious hope of For economic other than a major imperialist military base in downtrodden appendages of a country 8,000 miles hands of the imperialist propaganda machine*.
ported Argentina's claim to the islands, without endorsing Galtieri's government, it says. In its most important the position is that put forward by the International Marxist Group and presented in Socialist Challenge throughout the war. This is a vital and welcome step forward.
Debates among revoltLionary groups often seem obscure and incomprehen sible to the rest of the left. bearing no apparent relation to the real world. But the discussion on the left Malvinas brought everyone in Britain up against the issues involved in this dispute.
The first practical problem facing everyone 300.3 the fleet sailed, was whether to support it or try to stop it. The whole labour HOVELCHI Was divided. Foot delivered his nauseating commitment to Thatcher, and benn witn 32 other "traitors" -as the Sun labelled them - said the fleet should stop.
As far as we WSL Foot was the real traitor: a traitor to his class.
Problem We wanted to make the forces who called for fleet withdrawal as bie and cra fective possible along with CND's leader ship. SOCIET Organiser, the Socialist Workers' Party and much of the Labour left, we built demonstrations and conThere was a severe problem. The Militant editorial board did agree with the demand to STOP InC War. HES WAS a disaster. and we strongly polemicised with them, requesting their supporters refusal to oppose the war held back an important section the particularly the Young socialists from coming into the antiwar movement.
We joined hands with WSL supporters in strug gling to reverse the YS's orientation against Militant's leadership. But Renue commenda cond problem and this is where the recent debate comes in.
If you want to argue the South Atlantic, what alternative do you put forward?
The WSL NC majority 'alternative" led directly to the conclusion which SENSELE herself aTCH Halkandd one fight tor *Falkland sending the feet tri had determination' wimarawn, no omer prac tical outcome was possible Argentine recuperation. The left had CONTECHE this choose, from the two real possible outcomes war, waich would advance workers world scale.
We chose the outcome which would weaken The fantasy option which wat WSL NC majority chose a in practice, Thatcher's ideological of Objectively, this was a scrious adaptation to na 1018S. democratic pressure. This is reflected in the way the NC majority relations with the rest of the Labour left. It congratulates itself on dialogue the 'pacifist The ed nly the wsi conducted was with its revolutionary left critics abroad, nearly all of whom recognised its errors immediately.
We believe that this mistake now that the WSI. has corrected position, should lead the comrades of the new majority to conduct a serious study of why the WSL made such an error. ask them to turn the sear chlight which they often play so gangly on bea fellow-revolutionaries on themselves THOr years Cane main leaders of the new majority argued against oining the Fourth Inter national and its British secthe International Marxist Group- claiming that it was a poisoned well' which mUSI evitably lead revolutionaries into error.
In that case, comrades political rest faced by the most SCTIOIL.
TCVOEUHOHGLY
since 1945, why have you had to conduct such a hitpositions?
The truth of the matter is unis: une most dangerou pressures operating revolutionaries in Britain come, not from Marxists abroad but from the huge weight chauvinist ideology and insularity which permeates the British labour move. ment as a result of its imperians past and its perialist leaders This is transmitted particularly acutely by the This is not something to shrink reason to try and hide oneself in a pure world of one's own.
But it is a reason to understand the importance of a real, living organic contact with work ing struggles abroad organised, not vi a federation of tiny sects but via a living, ternational: the Fourth Internations.
----- pull-quotes -----
mally announced an important change of posi- tion on the recent South Atlantic war, in a
islands and did not sup- Britain attentih they ain-
strengthened links with the Argentine
awali concludes that the "unwittingly plays into the
organisation to which you now belong to the IMG