Scarborough on October 2, will arrive heartened by the militant lead given to the Labour movement at the Trades Union Congress just concluded at Brighton.
The fight against the right-wing policies of the Wilson government now takes on new depth and meaning. No longer is it confined to the hard core of leftwingers who have consistently fought for a socialist approach to the problems besetting Britain and the world. The most powerful trade-union movement in Western Europe has now come out for a break with Wilson's complicity in the Vietnam war, for an end to the antitrade-union economic policies of the Labour government.
This has transformed the whole situation. In the past the trade-union bureaucrats have been able to manipulate their millions of votes to sustain the right-wing conservative leadership of the Labour party. They were able to do this by appealing to the traditional class loyalties of the workers who responded because the Labour party was their party, created by the unions as the political voice of organized labour.
The return of a Labour government under Harold Wilson in 1964 and then with a massive majority in 1966 was the culmi-
nation of years of struggle and dogged work in the constituencies.
Disillusionment followed swiftly as the Labour government pursued largely the same line as its Tory predecessors. In the economic field, Wilson's administration was carrying out the injunctions of the bankers of the City, Wall Street and Zurich. In foreign affairs, Wilson was the tame lapdog of L.B.Johnson, lending his prestige to U.S. aggression in Vietnam and the Dominican Republic. Now disillusionment is turning into the beginnings of revolt.
This new spirit is reflected in the resolutions which the Labour Party Conference will be debating in October. True, resolutions similar in content could be found in the agendas of previous conferences, but, in the past, they represented the views of a minority, swimming against the stream, determined to keep the flame of socialism flickering -~-- a militant minority who knew beforehand that their resolutions would be defeated by the platform but who also knew it was their duty to keep the socialist principles before the movement.
This year the leadership in the fight for a socialist policy may well pass into the hands of the massive trade unions. This time there is every chance the platform will be defeated on decisive issues.
The mood which is sweeping the rank and file is well expressed in the resolution from Sheffield, Hallam CLP (Labour party constituency]:
"This Conference reaffirms its support for the programme on which the Labour Government was returned to power. In doing so it notes with deep regret the failure of the Government to withstand reactionary pressure both at home and abroad. In particular it calls upon the Government to end its present subservience to the economic policies of the Treasury and the City of London and the foreign policies of the American Government and it reiterates its conviction that only a Government committed to economic and social equality, ready greatly to extend public ownership and planning and prepared to conduct an independent foreign policy, can overcome the deepseated social and economic problems of Britain."
It is typical of many resolutions. Always there is the firm affirmation of support for a Labour government -- but a Labour government which carries out the wishes of its working-class supporters, not a Labour government subservient to the dictates of finance capital at home and abroad.
Even those who support the idea of a Prices and Incomes Policy are critical of the way it has operated: freezing wages while prices go up, creating a big pool of unemployment and generally lowering the hard-won living standards of the workers. What these would-be supporters of the government do not understand is that under capitalism the control of prices is virtually impossible and all the pious resolutions cannot change this fundamental economic fact.
Resolutions on foreign policy show an awareness of the interaction of domestic and foreign affairs. As the resolution from Liverpool, Wavertree CLP, states:
"Conference believes that a prerequisite to a socialist foreign policy is a thoroughgoing socialist domestic policy.
",..on the basis of capitalism at home, a Labour Government cannot show the way to economic and political freedom to the exploited, backward countries of the world.'
On Vietnam, there is some confusion from those who believe that the United Nations or negotiations between the American imperialists and Hanoi can resolve the conflict. But the socialist position is firmly put, for example, by the Bute and North Ayrshire CLP:
"This Conference recognises that the war in Vietnam is basically a class struggle between the people of Vietnam through the National Liberation Front, and the U.S. imperialists and the fascist puppet government in Saigon.
"Conference therefore urges the Labour Government to disassociate itself from the United States' imperialist policy, as only the Vietnamese have the right to decide the future of their country.
"Conference furthermore declares its belief in internationalism and pledges full support to the victory of the Vietnamese and the National Liberation Front."
One thing is certain! Wilson's backing of LBJ in Southeast Asia is going to get a severe thumping from the delegates at Scarborough. All these issues and many more which cannot be discussed in detail within the scope of a single article are of great importance for the future of British labour. But, perhaps the most important is the fight for democracy within the Labour party.
Since coming into power, the Wilson government has completely disregarded the movement when it voiced demands contrary to the interests of capital. Conference
must now face up to this issue and insist that the policies it adopts must become the basis for legislation introduced by the Labour government. If it fails to do this, the government will be labour in name only; in fact it would be the executive committee of the ruling class.
There are several resolutions on this vital issue which will probably be composited into a single resolution enbodying this demand for inner party democracy and insisting that the conference and not a cabinet cabal determine the policy to be pursued by the party's parliamentary representatives.