The attack on our party¶
Core Argument¶
Here, in an internal circular from May 1944, the leadership of the Revolutionary Communist Party (the British Trotskyists) assesses the strategic consequences of a state attack on their organisation. The arrest and trial of comrades under the Trade Disputes Act, alongside the introduction of the anti-labour Regulation 1AA, has, they argue, fundamentally altered the party’s relationship to the working class. The prosecution is a historical landmark, and the government’s own justification—that the regulation is needed to combat Trotskyists—has inadvertently conferred upon the party a public status as the acknowledged revolutionary wing of the labour movement. The mass reaction, while not yet active support, is one of sympathy and a recognition that the Trotskyists are being framed for their militancy.
This new situation forces a tactical reorientation. The party has entered a “limited united front” with the established left reformist leaders, most notably Aneurin Bevan and the Labour lefts, who opposed the anti-labour legislation in Parliament. For the first time, Trotskyists share a platform with these figures, a fact that positively integrates them into the labour movement in the eyes of advanced workers. The core argument of the circular is that this new proximity demands a shift in method, without any concession of principle. The party’s past approach—savage denunciation of left reformists as the primary target—was a product of isolation, directed at a narrow circle of the most advanced. Now, with a wider audience of left-wing Labour supporters who have genuine illusions in Bevan, a purely negative approach would be sectarian and self-defeating.
The directive is for a pedagogical, rather than purely polemical, exposure of the lefts. The party must emphasise the progressive aspect of the Bevanite revolt, posing before its supporters the necessity of drawing the logical conclusions from their leaders’ actions. On joint platforms, the Trotskyists should avoid direct attacks on their “allies of the day” unless provoked by outright chauvinism or strike-breaking. Instead, they will expose them positively, by stating their own revolutionary programme—break the coalition, place Labour in power on a socialist programme—thereby placing the responsibility on the lefts for refusing to follow through. The circular is notably wary of the manoeuvre, acknowledging that the reformists are experienced at blocs while the Trotskyists are entering this field with inadequate forces. The danger is not principled error, but tactical misstep. The ultimate purpose is not a bloc at the top, but integration with the thousands of rank-and-file workers who look to the lefts for a lead, drawing them into struggle against the anti-labour laws. The party must seize this favourable opportunity, even if the united front proves temporary.