RCP reply:
IL is tair enough for Charlie
Pottins (Workers' Press,
Saturday 15 November) to
Object: to the decision of
Liverpool WRP members to
campaign in_ support, of Re-
volutionary Communist Par-
ty "candidate Dave. Hall
Sworth in. the Knowsley
North by-election.
It is not legitimate howev-
er to justify this by distor.
tions, of RCP. positions and
slanders of the type often
produced in the past by Ger-
Fy Healy's News Line
‘The RCP never instructed
its members to drop out of
miners’ support groups dur.
ing the miners! srike, for
the simple reason that we
never supported these
groups in the first place.
While we were among the
first. to organise practical
solidarity work — collecting
money and food, ete — we
did not give our support to
committees which were set
up under the control of the
labour bureaucracy and
served the purpose of streny
thening its capacity to medi
ate between the mining com:
munities and the state.
We did not oppose a ‘yes’
vote for the political levy
Just because the union lead-
‘ers ran cynical campaigns
that disguised the fact that
virtually all these funds
would goto the Labour Party
(though we certainly pointed
this out).
‘We campaigned for trade
unionists to set up political
funds to be spent on objec-
tives consistent with work-
ers’ interests, rather than
wasting money financing a
party which consistently
‘acts against the interests of
the working class.
‘Our argument against sup-
jorting public ownership of
industries and services has
nothing in common with syn-
dicalism.
In fact it follows the tradi-
tions of the Communist In-
ternational and the Red In-
ternational of Labour Unions
in the early twenties.
‘The point is that whether
workers are employed by
private capitalists or by the
state-acting in the interests
I in, general, work
ers’ first priority is the de-
fence of jobs, wages and
working conditions
Workers, have no interest
in defending one form of
capitalist exploitation (pub-
lie ownership) against
another (privatisation)
The job-shedding, wage-
cutting consequences of un-
jon acquiescence in in-house
tenders as an alternative to
privatisation in the health
Service should alert all mili-
tants to this danger.
Charlie's allegations about
the Workers Against Racism
campaign sponsored by the
RCP are old slanders.
It is worth pointing out
that while everybody now
recognises the problem of
racist attacks, we were the
first to organise direct action
to deal with the problem and
bring it to the attention of the
labour movement
It is simply untrue that
any WAR representative
‘claimed credit for the inner
city riots.
‘When this accusation was
made by the gutter press at
the time, we categorically
denied it,
The allegation that we dis-
rupted a Newham Seven de-
monstration has long been
circulated by sectarian
Labour Party supporters in
Newham who resented the
success and popularity of
our campaigning work in the
area,
Why on earth should we
attempt, to disrupt, an anti-
racist demonstration? The
allegation is absurd.
Apart from these points,
Charlie seems to be scratch:
ing around to find something
to disagree with in our
Knowsley election platform.
‘Our demands put forward
a basic platform for working.
class unity at a time when
the Labour Party is moving
further to the right to
appease the demands of the
establishment and improve
its position in the opinion
polls.
Tt was encouraging to see
that ‘the WRP in Liverpool
Tecognised this basic class
issue in the Knowsley North
by-election, and worrying to
see that others in the WRP
are inclined to take the sort
of traditional sectarian line
hich could only help to put
Kinnock’s stooge in West-
minster.
Inthe months leading up to
‘Unfair criticism’
the general election, build-
ing a coherent working class
alternative to the Labour
Party must be the top prior-
ity for the left — and this
pFoject cannot be the proper-
ty of any individual orga-
nisation.
‘The future of the working
class after the election —
whichever party wins — will
depend upon it.
Alan Harding,
RCP election agent, Knows-
ley North