Surely proportional representation can only lead to a coalition and a situation in which it's most unlikely that Labour will be elected again.
The argument put forward on the Labour left by people like Peter Hain and Geoff Hodgson is an opportunist argument. It ignores that Labour originally in favour of PR - wien it was a nira party. There are two ways of approaching it.
If one's in an ultra-left mood one can say well the only thing that will solve the problems of the working class is the overthrow of capitalism, preferably by an insurrection which leads to soviet power Sampehi for which happen some time. DOWCVET OUE has to be to ensure the largest possible participation of werking people in politics.
that point of view the present electoral SyStem IS EISENLEE" serves the needs of the ruling class LWOWaODa! ties which differed from each other on the pace of change, but not on fundamentals. People who defend PR are told that the SDP want PR, but SO Maggie Thatcher and Powell defend the present system The real point is that a OV ONCe-CiCCC! by a minority vote under ine present svstem can get away with it because it is a capitalist CUYCI HUICHE which attacks the workers. If a left Labour government, a Bennite ment, was elected on minority vote and tried to push through capitalist BICOSUTCS LIC class resistance would be phenomenal, and the first point they would make is that it was only a minority government. BESTAL HES SUBDOES dispensable if you want to COOLE SOc als! change.
The argument that you would never see Labour in can only be put for•DUWCE ward if people are totally pessimistic about the chance of winning mass support. sort of system AVOlaVe TSeITi crucial. If the Labour ParLV COCHET DUE ONWa ULS wn plan for PR, you are INCL -LO HaYC YCLY undemocratic system imposed.
Under a PR system you vould have a Labour Par ty compelled to create a mass base. Labour would forced to become political party fighting for a mass membership in the factories and the comits own daily newspaper that's the only way it could get mass support.
Surely it's no accident that the main argument for PR CORTeS those, like the Eurocommunists who want coalition with the SDP? Here and now the main thing is to get Labour government. Even a Labour government with 38 per cent of the vote could be forced to carry out radical, anti-capitalist, measures?
PR would force Labour to cease Deing Just -elec toral machine and create a mass base Since the cond world war we've had four Labour governments generally on minority votes. I don't think that a 3La00 government elected with just 38 per cent of the vote would evel try to get radical ECONO like unilateralism through.
This question of a maio ty of hop au aa dote radical to push verough ainthrough capitalist reforms. This question can't be evaded for an 'opting in system of party membership in the unions? To respond to the Tebbit and SDP attacks by ourselves creating an 'opting in system is unnecessarily CeTeRS Ve I don't think it's defensive. The block vote is unprecedented in any other socialist party In the It is what ensures the domination union bureaucracy in the Lbo Fy. tnt umon. should of course affiliate nationalv to the Labou Party, , but they shouldn't have the right to determine policy that should be the right of the members On this issue the left are simply hutting their eyes, but people like David Basnett are very well aware block vote poses to the right wings domination.
The point about the block vote is that its use •eTer ReD HENe bureaucracy the mass of the members. Democratising the block vote doesn't mean breaking the link with the unions I'm totally in favour of union affiliation. Those who are in the Labour Party through their factor branches and so on should elect Telegate •LOLT ference. Ne could have gradual process over the next decade for changing this anomalous position.
In the first place a should take the lead by letting the NUM conference decide the way the vote was cast on crucia Issues The present undemocratic system leads to de-politicisation at the base of the unions, and Should Labour government elected on say only 40 per cent of the popular vote at tempt to carry through radical measures? Scolio unlikely that such government could be elected with a bigger vote than that in the short term?
Idon't think that the situation is finished. The next election will see probably a low Labour vote. What I find amazing by people who should know better, like the Communist Party, is that the words 'capitalist crisis have virtually gone out of fashion.
British capitalism is going through thẻ biggest crisis since the 1920s and sooner or later it will have a massive impact on the working class.
Up till now it hasn't had such big impact because although unemployment large, you have not had - contrary to demagogy massive an attack on the living STanezTes of employed workers as people thought was going to If that had happened at the same time as unemployment I'm CULL vinced you would have had massive explosions in the workers movement. If the Tories are elected again then you will have them trying to de-capitate ue unions ana ned witn that a really fundamental allach WELINSIR and living standards which thev naven t done in this term of government. Transform Im a Marxist. I refuse to believe the . working class will sit laly by and say 'come and drive your SLEETO CES Ovei There will be reDO LOSCEO the working class, and it will ECCLES -IESU Labour Party and at the base of the -ULUL -11UL Labour isn't to Tony Cliff's arms, you might well see some form of British far right movement with support in the working class But I'm not pessimistic about the 1980s. I retain a scientific belief capacity of the working class to defend itself. You have to keep in mind the capitalist crisis. enough simply talk about the fact that Thatcher effective populist or the ideological impact Tories. There is a limit to the ef-COLVCIC ideolog) when it collides with the material interests of workers. So there can be a radicalisation which as the 1980s develop the left can link up with. I'm not at all pessimistic.
Sure the Eurocommunists are right to insist •anat ine ola trachonal sec of the working class LULU are in dechne ENCY dH case that means that there working class not so muci WOEKERE there class а нет турс left? No of based in heavy industry.
But as capitalism exists it relies on wage labour. So instead of saying we have to link up with the SDP or that the decisive sectors of the elec torate live in Hampstead still base ourselves on the radicalisation of the working class to create a mass socialist party.
Could a Labour Party committed to carrying anti-capitalist reforms come into existence without the right wing splitting off?
absolutely inconceivable in my opinion Labour could be transformed with its pre sent composition. It's out -OTER CTeSO There is no way that the right wing WOLC aCCEDEICD capitalist wing would al There would be a setting SOfIt stage walk OI aLLUUILs There is a long tradition of the right going out