[I find Socialist Organiser quite good in general…]
Socialist Organiser1981 1981-08-20Read it in the scan (PDF), scan page 13 →
Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: expect misread words, and now and then a caption or a line from a neighbouring story. For anything you quote, read the scan.
Scan page 13
I find Socialist Organiser quite good in general, but there was an irritating misuse of terms (and a few mysterious ones) in the July 30 edition.
For example, the SWP is described as 'ultra-leftist' The Angry Brigade was ultraleftist, the Red Army Fraction is ultra-leftist, the Red Brigades are ultra-leftist, and despite serious disagreements politically, I love these comrades.
They have spirit of rebellion that wants to pull the head off the capitalist state and carry the flames of resistance in their blood. How on earth can you put them in the same camp as the jelly baby, Schachtmanite, state-cap SWP bunch?
'Syndicalist' is described away as narrowly trade unionist, which is a contemporary American leftist usage which robs syndicalism of its revolutionary anarchist politics. In correctly criticising Hallas for rewriting the history of the Labour Party, the author does the same thing to Syndicalist traditions in Britain.
Different means While defending the Irish revolution, the centre pages give the distinct impression that the actual punters with the guns and 'the demogogues in their political wing weren't quite approved of. Maybe they've got a different means of progress and therefore haven't got it quite right.
However all these things aside, I find the paper very good. I hope the niggling, irritating sentences will phase themselves out in time.
Revolutionary greetings, DAVE DOUGLASS, Delegate Branch NUM Hatfield Main