By now the break up of the 'Socialist Alliance', through the walk out of the Socialist Party (formerly Militant), is common knowledge. The Socialist Party blame the SWP for this divorce while, of course, the Socialist Workers Party, just as venomously, lay the blame at the door of the Socialist Party. The only thing that amazes one about this episode is not that the break has come but that they actually held their 'alliance' together at all for any length of time.
The 'Socialist Alliance' was a conglomeration of 15 Trotskyist parties and groups as well as various 'individual' members, all of whom had their own programmes and policies and all of whom were (still are) infected by that single trait common to all Trotskyists - pessimism. This pessimism, which runs through all the works of Trotsky and that of all his miserable political offspring, is shown in their inability to trust each other, their disbelief in the possibility of overthrowing imperialism and building socialism, and, most criminally, their total distrust and doubt in the revolutionary ability of the proletariat.
These petty-bourgeois anarchists (Trotskyist revolutionaries if you will) seek to hide their cowardice and capitulation to the myth of unassailable imperialism by their ultra-revolutionary rantings (which always seem to lead in the end to supporting imperialism) on the one hand and their constant bickering and denunciation of each other over trivial matters on the other hand.
The chosen point of departure in this case seems to be whether or not the 'Socialist Alliance' should maintain its federal structure or move towards a single party, with the argument about whether or not the largest group/party should have the largest say in the running of their 'Socialist Alliance' coming a close second (which of their 'alliances's' parties got most votes among them was a not too distant third). Of course, whether the 'Socialist Alliance' retained its federalism or not is irrelevant. The only reason for the existence of this dubious 'alliance' was to counter the increasing popularity (albeit still quite small at this stage) of the Socialist Labour Party, whom these Trotskyist parties and groups had failed to control or conquer. It must be noted that up until the formation of the SLP in 1996 as a party of the working class sworn to fight against the Labour Party (including contesting as many seats as possible in elections) on a socialist platform, all the parties and groups of the 'Socialst Alliance' had called for support for the Labour Party in elections and some even repeated this call in the last General Election in seats where they were not standing.
The poor showing of the 'Socialist Alliance' in that election sparked their inbuilt pessimism and left them looking at the facts of life (which always run counter to Trotskyist fallacies) and left them facing the prospect of many years of hard, disciplined, principled work to win the support of the proletariat or pick a fight with each other over some triviality in order to maintain their ultra left posturing and make sure they don't end up anywhere near a genuine revolutionary position. Not surprisingly, as always, they took the latter road.
There are some individuals who will, in all sincerity, berate us for triumphalist gloating over the downfall of a 'rival' and will warn us, with equal sincerity, that we may not be able to fill the void left by the collapse of the 'Socialist Alliance'. Our answer must be: (1.) That any misfortune for those who seek to drag the proletariat down the road of serving imperialism through pessimist belief in their own strength is a triumph for our class as it weakens what little support these petty-bourgeois anarchists have; and, (2.) No void is left as, in spite of the break up of the 'Socialist Alliance' it, without the Socialist Party, just like the Socialist Party and all the other Trotskyist groups and parties outside of the now even smaller 'Socialist Alliance' will be around as long as imperialism lasts, for imperialism will always find work for the Trojan Horse that is Trotskyism within our movement.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments on this article? E-mail the editor
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Go to Back issues 2001
Return to Homepage