Solidarity or sectarianism

Scan page 13

'Don't dig there Dig it elsewhere You're digging it round It ought to be square The shape of it's wrong It's much too long And you can't put a hole Where a hole don't belong' These were the words of the bowler hatted gent giving arbitrary instructions to a labourer at work in the old Bernard Cribbins song.

But they seem equally apt as an explanation for the curious display of sectarian hostility by Socialist Challenge to this Saturday's labour movement demonstration support of Solidarnosc.

Socialist Challenge has now appointed itself the arbiter of solidarity activity - and decided for its own reasons, to publicly attack a demonstration which it has been repeatedly urged to co-sponsor. From such behaviour nobody can benefit. ( The demonstration was called at the initiative of Socialist Organiser and London Labour Briefing as the continuation of appeals by both papers. -at first supported by Socialist Challenge - for a campaign of labour movement support to Solidarnosc independent of the Thatcher/Reagan cold war propaganda blitz.

It has been supported by the London Regional Executive of the London Labour Party, by ASTMS No. 7 Divisional Council, and by a number of CLPs and union branches.

Ken Livingstone has given a news conference to support it, and Reg Race MPand the Slidarnose Trade Union Working Group are to speak at the rally.

It has been advertised by Socialist Worker and Labour Weekly. And it has been opposed by only one tendency - Socialist To justify this curious stance, Socialist Challenge has taken a whole page of their March 4 edition. Readers are treated to an introduction of innocuous generalities on the need for labour movement solidarity with Solidarnosc, the failure of either the TUC or the Labour Party leadership to offer such solidarity, and the fight that has been waged by rank and file socialists to rectify this weakness.

The article points to the concrete example of such work done in Scotland -carefully omitting the lead ing role of Socialist Organ iser supporters in the loca committee.

It correctly underline: the need to build loca labour movement suppor for Solidarnose:

"now, through financia aid, adoption of internee and other suitable means.

We quite agree: And wi agree when author Marti Meteyard goes on to insis that. the campaign mus "build up such a head o steam in the labour move ment on this issue that th TUC and Labour Part leaders are themselves forced to organise action in support of Solidarnosc."

Their proposals to take such a fight into the labour movement are positive. But then comes a curious sentence which marks the switch from general discussion to " particularised sectarianism. From calls for local, rank and file activities in support of Solidarnosc, Meteyard suddenly turns round and insists:

'Nothing less will do than for the TUC and Labour leaders to organise a national demonstration in support of Solidarnosc, a national tour of the labour financial appeal to help Solidarnose rebuild shattered apparatus."

N thing less? Does this mea tha the local demonstra ions juintly sponsured by Socialist Challenge and Socialist Organiser in places such as Oxford, Glasgow and Birmingham should not have occurred?

Is this what Meteyard means when he declares:

"Any attempt by rank and file activists to substitute themselves for this process risks harming rather than helping the of Solidarnosc in cause Britain."

From .this haughty position Meteyard launches into the main purpose of his article vigorously denouncing the demonstration called by SO and Briefing.

With a lordly wave of the hand he dismisses Socialist Organiser and Briefing as "two small groups in the And ignoring the evidSocialist Organiser no.76 March 11, 1982 Page 14

Scan page 14

----- pull-quotes -----

movement by Solidarnosc activists, and a national