The ILP at the crossroads¶
Core Argument¶
This chapter dissects the Independent Labour Party’s (ILP) proposed reaffiliation to the Labour Party as an act of unconditional surrender to reformism, not a strategic manoeuvre. The ILP’s National Administrative Council advocated a return on pre-1932 terms, but only after the end of the coalition government. The text argues this is a capitulation, not a principled regroupment. It draws on John McGovern’s admission that the ILP erred after disaffiliation: it naively believed workers would automatically transfer allegiance from Labour to the ILP; its united front with the Communist Party repelled members; and internal factionalism caused catastrophic membership loss. Crucially, the text contends that McGovern merely echoed Trotsky’s earlier warnings. Trotsky had predicted that splitting from Labour on the vague issue of parliamentary discipline would fail to win mass support, and that association with the Stalinists would prove disastrous. The ILP leadership, however, never genuinely analysed these mistakes.
The core argument is that the ILP never broke with reformism. Its present resolutions differ little from Labour’s, rendering the original disaffiliation incomprehensible. The text contrasts Trotsky’s insistence that the ILP must maintain a clear revolutionary programme and offer only critical support to Labour, with the ILP now openly identifying with Labour’s platform. It highlights the hypocrisy of Ridley, who once declared Labour a “dead corpse” but later suggested Labour might choose revolution or counter-revolution in power. The chapter concludes that the Labour Party will always defend counter-revolution.
A genuine Marxist party, the text argues, would seek affiliation to win workers inside the Labour Party to revolutionary socialism. This would require open negotiations, retaining the right to criticise Labour leaders, and explaining its position publicly—even if Labour remained in coalition. Such a course would strengthen bonds with Labour’s rank and file. The Labour leaders want ILP affiliation to provide a left cover for retaining mass support, as after the last war. But the situation now differs: the ILP would become a crystallising point for radicalising workers, intensifying the split between its reformist and revolutionary wings. Entry will force the centrist leadership to reveal its hand. Affiliation will accelerate differentiation within both parties, and revolutionary workers will come to see that only Bolshevism and the Fourth International’s programme can achieve socialist revolution.