Did the British Trotskyists have no perspective for the ILP?¶
Core Argument¶
This chapter is a polemical defence of the British Revolutionary Communist Party’s (RCP) strategic perspective on the Independent Labour Party (ILP), rebutting the charge that the Trotskyists worked within it without any plan. The core argument is that the RCP possessed a coherent, Marxist analysis of the ILP as a centrist formation, and that this analysis was consistently updated in line with objective conditions. The author insists that the Trotskyists did not act blindly, but rather based their tactics on a sober assessment of the ILP’s inevitable trajectory.
The chapter’s key claim is that the ILP was doomed to disintegration. It draws on three successive conference documents to demonstrate this. The 1943 perspective characterised the ILP as “revolutionary words – reformist deeds,” predicting that the leadership would swing rightwards back into the Labour Party once the wartime coalition broke. This was deemed a “progressive step” because it would accelerate differentiation within the ILP, exposing its centrist nature to worker members, and facilitate the emergence of a mass left inside Labour. The 1944 Fusion Conference endorsed this. The 1945 analysis, written after Labour’s election victory and the ILP’s failure to secure affiliation, predicted the ILP would “disappear ignominiously,” citing its electoral defeat (retaining only three seats), its isolation from industrial workers, and the possibility that Labour lefts would move towards Stalinism or form new centrist organisations rather than join the ILP. The chapter argues these perspectives were not contradictory but reflected the ILP’s evolution under pressure.
The historical context is the ILP’s previous oscillation between reformism and revolution, specifically its 1920-23 shift towards the Communist International before swinging back to Labour. The theoretical framework is Trotsky’s analysis of centrism, which the RCP claims to have applied “conscientiously and soberly.” The chapter’s polemic is directed at a comrade named Stuart, who allegedly accused the RCP of lacking a perspective. The author dismisses Stuart’s criticism as a “figment of his imagination,” noting that entry into the ILP was discussed in the old Workers’ International League (WIL) in 1941-42 but correctly rejected in favour of open work. The chapter mocks Stuart’s position by citing ILP leader Fenner Brockway’s own pessimistic admission that “You Trotskyists are waiting to bury us,” alongside evidence of falling membership and New Leader sales. The author concludes that Stuart’s errors stem from a “lack of a serious Marxist approach,” specifically his failure to grasp the ILP’s objective evolution and his tendency to let a single period’s estimate dominate strategy.