{"id":2889,"date":"2021-04-26T14:01:35","date_gmt":"2021-04-26T12:01:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/marxistworkersparty.org.za\/?page_id=2889"},"modified":"2021-04-26T15:27:59","modified_gmt":"2021-04-26T13:27:59","slug":"udf-militants-inqaba-editors-comment","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/?page_id=2889","title":{"rendered":"\u2018UDF militants\u2019 \u2013 a Voice for Workers\u2019 Democracy in the Movement"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Originally published in Inqaba No. 18\/19 (February 1986).<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The revolutionary struggles of black workers and youth these past 18 months have caused a turn by the most active layers to socialist ideas.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is reflected in the rich crop of legal, illegal, and semi-legal publications produced by hundreds of groups and organisations in the movement up and down the country.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Outstanding among them has been a paper by \u2018UDF militants\u2019, which is produced and distributed clandestinely inside SA.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is clear from the content of the paper that its writers are actively involved in youth, community and trade union organisations, and are closely in touch with developments in factories and townships in several regions of the country.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Using typescript and a simple layout, with photostatic reproduction, this paper achieves a high standard technically, as well as in the clarity with which it is written. The basis of that clarity is a consistency of ideas \u2013 which fundamentally coincide with the ideas that have been put forward by Inqaba<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first \u2018UDF militants\u2019 issue appeared in April 1985. Recognising that it represented an important development in the movement, we reprinted it in London and gave it extensive circulation abroad. Extracts were also reprinted in the British Marxist weekly, Militant<\/em>, on 19 July.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Since then two further issues have come into our hands, published apparently in June and August respectively. While we do not see eye to eye on every point in these issues \u2013 including some quite important points \u2013 it is clear that we are in agreement with the general approach and most of the detailed policies which the comrades are pursuing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the next pages, we republish a small selection of articles from these first three issues of the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 paper [omitted here – MWP 2021<\/em>]. Following that, the Inqaba<\/em> editorial board takes up some of the political issues raised in the paper, on which we think further clarification is needed if the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 are to develop their excellent initiative to its full potential.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\u2018UDF Militants\u2019 \u2013 Inqaba <\/em>Editors\u2019 Comment<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In commenting on the first three issues of the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 paper, we are conscious that whatever we can safely write here is no adequate substitute for lengthy discussion with editors and writers of the paper. We hope the opportunity to do that systematically is not too long delayed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We would like to congratulate the comrades on their achievement. The paper is well grounded within the mass movement and is splendidly free of the sectarian tone which characterises so much of the critical left-wing and pro-socialist press in SA. It is written with confidence in the basis of mass support which exists for policies of workers\u2019 power and socialism in the struggle to overthrow the apartheid regime.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

That basis of mass support, as the comrades know well from experience, exists above all within the working class ranks of the UDF youth and community organisations, and among the members of the democratic non-racial trade unions. The firm commitment of the paper to building the UDF, to building a mass ANC, and to building a united federation of industrial unions (now launched as Cosatu) stands out on virtually every page. This provides a large part of the political strength of the paper, and would ensure its viability even under the severest persecution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But that is why, in our view, dangers are opened up by the addition of the Azapo symbol (alongside symbols of the main Congress and trade union organisations) on the front page of issues 2 and 3, and also by the way in which the comrades take up the question of the united front<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Elsewhere in this issue of Inqaba<\/em>, in our reply to the letter of a \u2018group of 55\u2019, we have reiterated our position on Azapo<\/a>, explaining why socialists should not in any way treat it as an equivalent of the UDF (or Congress movement) when taking up the vital task of building mass unity in the struggle.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It becomes clear on studying the paper that the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 do not in fact look on Azapo as any kind of \u2018equivalent\u2019 of the UDF. \u201cAzapo is tiny, without mass support\u201d, they write on page 12 of the second issue. But that is the very reason why it would be incorrect for the mass Congress movement<\/strong>, or the left-wing within it, to put forward a united front<\/strong> with Azapo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A \u2018united front\u2019 must be a united front of mass organisations<\/strong> \u2013 or it is no addition to the fighting strength of the movement and becomes, on the contrary, a swamp of unending disunity. Before going further into this subject, however, we should deal with a separate but seemingly related point.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Defend Democracy<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

We fully agree with the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 in deploring the violent outbreaks that have occurred between UDF and Azapo supporters \u2013 some involving killings \u2013 which can only play into the hands of the state. <\/strong>We would defend the democratic right<\/strong> of Azapo supporters, and of the supporters of all other tendencies and organisations struggling to bring down the apartheid regime, to put forward their views within the movement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

They should be given a hearing, their mistaken views should be answered in debate with facts and serious arguments. They should be defeated politically, not by intimidation or force \u2013 for this is the way to raise the political level of, and really unify<\/strong>, the whole movement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In turn, they must abandon hooligan tactics against their opponents, and observe the paramount rule of unity in action<\/strong>. This means refusing to act as obstacles or strikebreakers when mass action is undertaken, simply because they happen to \u2018disagree\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The \u2018UDF militants\u2019 write:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We have seen militants attacking people with petrol bombs because of political disagreements… We have seen workers attacked by militants because they did not hear about a stayaway, or because nobody tried to convince them and their union about the need for a stayaway.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

It is, a thousand times right to deplore this. At the same time, those who deliberately<\/strong> put themselves in active opposition to the mass movement when it is actually engaging in a fight against the bosses or the state  \u2013 those who break strikes, etc., and thereby threaten the vital interests of the whole working class \u2013 have only themselves to blame if they get a drubbing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We agree wholeheartedly with the approach taken by the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 in their article: \u201cThe method of workers\u2019 democracy\u201d (issue 2). We also agree with the point made in this passage in the same issue:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

…we say to our UDF comrades \u2013 \u2018Yes, the UDF is the majority organisation, with mass support from workers and youth. It is true that Azapo is tiny, without mass support. It is true that Azapo leaders are wrong to try to stand outside the mass organisations, instead of fighting to strengthen them. All of these things are true. But still, there are brothers and sisters of ours who support Azapo, who are fighting the bosses and their government, who are oppressed and exploited just like us. We need to stand together with them in struggle. That is the way to convince them that we are right \u2013 not by attacking them…\u2019<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

However, we believe the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 are muddling things up when they use this as an argument in favour of a UNITED FRONT between the UDF and Azapo.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In fact it is an argument only for approaching the good revolutionary elements, especially of the youth, within Azapo (and related organisations) for fraternal but frank discussion and to persuade them to break with sectarianism and throw their energies in with the UDF in the course of mass campaigns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Dual Purpose<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When used by revolutionary socialists, the UNITED FRONT tactic always has a dual purpose, which it is essential to bear in mind.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the one hand its purpose is to bring to bear against the class enemy the maximum real fighting forces of the working class in action<\/strong>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Many of the trade unions, including the most powerful, have not entered the UDF. It is essential to call (as the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 do) for a united front of these unions with the UDF on an agreed, specific program of action. The primary purpose of this is to draw together in struggle against the bosses and the regime the hundreds of thousands of union members and the millions of other mainly working class people \u2013 especially the youth \u2013 who look to the UDF for leadership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Trotsky put it:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

… the greater is the mass drawn into the movement, the higher the self-confidence rises, all the more self-confident will that mass movement be and all the more resolutely will it be capable of marching forward, however modest may be the initial slogans of struggle.<\/p>The First Five Years of the Communist International<\/strong>, Vol. 2<\/cite><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Mass Organisations<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Because the purpose of the united front is to draw together and embolden the mass of the working class, raising confidence in its latent power, only a united front of different mass organisations makes any sense. If a \u2018united front\u2019 is proposed of all and sundry, of big organisations with little sects (however committed the fighters in their ranks), it is usually because this essential point of the united front has been lost sight of.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But there is another weightier point to bear in mind. Revolutionary socialists have a second purpose in employing the united front tactic. This is to separate the rank-and-file supporters of a rival mass organisation from their leaders and to win them instead to our organisation and our leadership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

How these inter-related but different purposes behind the united front tactic are pursued in practice will depend on the concrete circumstances in each case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the trade union field, the policy of Marxists is to fight for the unification of the workers in one union per industry, and the unification of the unions in one federation (obviously Cosatu). In the unions, and in the federation, we fight for the influence and predominance of Marxist ideas, policies and methods. This means combatting in a systematic way the ideas, policies, methods and influence of reformist and opportunist leaders and trends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the political field our approach is determined by the absence of a mass revolutionary party of the working class \u2013 something which cannot, as we have explained elsewhere<\/a>, now be summoned directly into existence by groups of revolutionary cadres or by an advanced minority of workers within the unions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Our present task is to seek to unite the mass of the working class under one political banner, namely Congress \u2013 so as to prevent the carving up of the movement between rival opportunist leaders, and to frustrate the enemy\u2019s attempts at divide-and- rule.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In taking this approach to what is (let us acknowledge), in the character of its leadership and political tradition, a petty-bourgeois nationalist organisation, we base ourselves on the overwhelming numerical and social weight of the black working class in South Africa. For a combination of historical reasons, the black working class has traditionally rallied to Congress, and will inevitably return again and again to the Congress banner as it seeks the road to power in the revolutionary epoch now opening-up.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is inside one mass Congress movement that revolutionaries can work most effectively to establish the political predominance of the working class and the influence of Marxism upon the whole mass movement. It is here that the struggle to defeat reformist and opportunist \u2013 including especially Stalinist \u2013 trends is assured the best conditions for eventual victory.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is the route \u2013 through the building and transformation of the Congress movement \u2013 to the creation of the mass revolutionary working class party under Marxist leadership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By advocating the purposeful entry of unions into the UDF \u2013 and, failing that, united front action of the unions and the UDF together in well-planned and sustained campaigns \u2013 we seek to advance both the politicisation of the trade unions and the proletarianisation of the UDF\/Congress organisations and leadership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The language of \u2018unity\u2019 and of the \u2018united front\u2019 is not, of course, a special property of Marxists. Whether in the trade union or directly political field, reformists and opportunists often find themselves quite at home with this terminology. But invariably what they have in mind is some form of institutional<\/strong> \u2018united front\u2019, or permanent peace pact between leaders, which avoids the necessity of a real straggle<\/strong> to win over the ranks of their political rivals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Revolutionaries, on the other hand, have no interest in a \u2018united front\u2019 of words and pretty resolutions which lull<\/strong> the masses to sleep, believing that \u201cif everyone is united, everything must be fine\u201d. We must wage war against the concept of such a \u2018united front\u2019, behind which opportunists and reformists take shelter, and which serves as a screen for inaction in fact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The approach of Marxism to the united front is to propose it exclusively as a practical combination of different, including rival, mass organisations for the purpose of striking simultaneously a planned blow in action against the enemy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A united front is for action or it is for nothing. Only in action<\/strong> and through action is the working class able to test decisively the relative merits, clarity, policy, boldness and firmness of rival leaderships. Only through action<\/strong> do the political differences stand out sharply enough to be fully clarified for the masses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nobody could doubt that the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 are proposing unity for purposes of action<\/strong>. Nevertheless, we are concerned that in their material on the question of a united front, all the emphasis is placed on the advantages of \u2018unity\u2019 (which, of course, we do not for a moment dispute), and no emphasis is placed on the need to use<\/strong> the united front tactic to break<\/strong> the hold of reformist and opportunist leaders over their followers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Azapo<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The lack of clarity on the united front is brought to light especially in relation to Azapo, which is why we are concentrating on that subject here. It is revealed particularly in the call for a \u201cUNITED FRONT OF ALL ORGANISATIONS\u201d as \u201cthe only way to mobilise enough strength against Botha and the bosses\u201d (issues 1, 2 and 3), and the call \u201cFOR CO-OPERATION AND UNITED ACTION OF UDF AND Azapo\u201d (issue 3).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To propose a \u2018united front\u2019 with Azapo dignifies it as an organisation possessing a mass following which it actually lacks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Instead of hammering home the glaring fact of this weakness to the socialist youth within Azapo, the proposal of a united front with Azapo serves to obscure this fact from them. Instead of winning them over through the attractive power of a growing, genuinely democratic and socialist left-wing within the Congress movement, proposing a \u2018united front\u2019 with Azapo will tend to sustain its existence as a sectarian rival.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This therefore would complicate and delay the necessary task (which the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 are in a very good position to carry forward) of eliminating Azapo by political means. We should not hesitate to recognise the necessity of its elimination.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why? Because it is of paramount importance that the question of \u201cfor or against socialism\u201d, \u201cfor or against workers\u2019 democracy and workers\u2019 power\u201d \u2013 the clash between petty-bourgeois and working class leadership \u2013 should be concentrated and fought out within a mass working class movement united under one political banner, within one political framework \u2013 Congress \u2013 so as to prevent dangerous splits of the movement later.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although we think it is now virtually ruled out that Azapo would ever be able to grow into a mass organisation to rival Congress, it is still important to use a political battle against Azapo to educate the movement, and above all to release from its sectarian influences a good few hundred valuable revolutionary youth \u2013 who could become some of the best fighters for socialism in Congress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, nowhere in the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 paper do we find any clear political criticism of Azapo. Its leaders are merely reproached for standing \u201coutside the mass organisations\u201d instead of \u201cstrengthening\u201d (!) them. The comrades are too polite even to attack the strike-breaking role of the Azapo leaders in November 1984 \u2013 something flowing not accidentally from Azapo\u2019s petty-bourgeois nationalist and opportunist politics and incurably sectarian method.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Yet how can the socialist youth in Azapo be won for the working class movement if they are not forced by relentless political criticism from revolutionary socialists in the UDF to break decisively with Azapo and its leadership?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To simply propose a \u2018united front\u2019 with Azapo as the solution to division in the movement shows that the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 are not taking the problem up in a fundamental, political way \u2013 but rather hoping for an organisational formula to solve it. That will not work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Trade Unions<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The problem of the \u2018united front\u2019 is posed also in the trade union field. Here the dual purpose in the united front tactic, set out above, also applies \u2013 and leads, in the concrete circumstances, to a different conclusion than in the case of Azapo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

CUSA and AZACTU remain outside the ranks of Cosatu. The \u2018UDF militants\u2019 have correctly called for the leaders of CUSA and AZACTU unions to join the new federation and not use their political differences as a pretext for staying out. The need for a united trade union movement within which political differences can be democratically discussed and fought out is the decisive consideration for anyone who is serious about defeating the bosses and the state.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, CUSA at least retains a mass membership in some of its unions. It is quite possible that, because of the overwhelming weight of Cosatu, much of the CUSA membership will tend to drift over to Cosatu unions in the next period. However, it would be wrong to be complacent about that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Workers usually have a tenacious loyalty to the organisation through which they first awakened to struggle, and are not immediately fully conscious of the political issues \u2013 or the bureaucratic interests and manoeuvres of the leaders \u2013 which may keep their particular organisation separated from the mass of the class. This is especially the case with a trade union where the whole workforce in a particular plant or section of an industry is organised in one body.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It may well prove a very difficult task to win over the ranks of CUSA unions to Cosatu and end the separate existence of that body.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Thus the application of the united front tactic by Cosatu becomes very important. But the first condition for its success is a clear program of action on the part of Cosatu. A \u2018unity\u2019 merely of declarations and phrases, as already pointed out, would be the opposite of a real united front. It would be a screen for passivity of leadership \u2013 and keep the rival organisations separated in fact.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A campaign of action, on the other hand, on a clear demand or demands (however modest) which are popular among workers generally \u2013 combined with a call for a united front \u2013 would lay the basis for winning the ranks of CUSA into Cosatu (as well as recruiting many thousands of new members to Cosatu\u2019s affiliated unions).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This would succeed to the extent that the leaders and activists in Cosatu unions show themselves in action to be a more effective fighting force than their rivals, and so draw to them the CUSA (etc.) ranks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If, on the other hand, the offer of a united front \u2013 properly put forward in fraternal terms both at leadership level and through direct approaches by the rank-and-file \u2013 were rejected by the CUSA union leaders, that would be all the more reason for their members to go over to Cosatu unions in the course of an action campaign.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are convinced that the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 will make their paper, as well as their day-to-day political work in the movement, much more effective if they clarify their approach to the question of unity and the united front along these lines.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Politics<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Together with this, we believe, there should be the development of a more politically critical approach in the paper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No doubt correctly, to begin with, the comrades\u2019 priority has been to establish the immediate practical relevance of their slogans and tactics in the midst of the battles against the bosses and the regime which have consumed every waking moment of the activists over the past year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Hence, no doubt, the concentration on organisational and tactical questions, on \u2018unity\u2019 and \u2018action\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On its own, however, this will prove inadequate to sustain the development of the paper, and the groups around it \u2013 in the longer term, or even possibly during the period of relative ebb which we are temporarily passing through.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is necessary, even in an agitational paper for mass distribution, to give space to explaining basic ideas (i.e., to theory, popularly presented); to examining perspectives; and to analysing the political differences between various organisations, leaders and tendencies. This is an area in which we feel the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 paper has so far been lacking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u2018Unity\u2019 as a political position is not a sufficient prescription for all ills. An example of the inadequacy of this is in the second issue of the paper, in the article on the lesions of the strike over the death of Andries Raditsela.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Correctly it is explained that the union leadership were to blame for the relatively low response to the strike call. However, this is ascribed purely to the lack of a united committee to organise the strike.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A more powerful point to have made was that, in contrast to the November 1984 strike in the Transvaal and the one in the Eastern Cape in March 1985, there was no attempt by the strike organisers to harness the drive of the youth to mobilise workers. (This despite the fact that COSAS activist Sipho Mutsi had also been murdered by the regime.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nevertheless, the main point to bring out in a Marxist paper is the political reason why the Fosatu leaders failed to mobilise the workers adequately for the Raditsela strike \u2013 which is inseparably connected with their refusal to lead nationwide general strike action during the whole period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To get to the bottom of this, it is necessary for the paper to critically examine the ideas, the assumptions, the origins, the strength of reformist and economist influences and tendencies within the unions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you merely give organisational and tactical arguments in your criticism of a union or political leadership, you may get the agreement of many workers and youth. But you will not help them to understand for themselves why the same organisational and tactical failings are repeated again and again by the leadership of the movement unless you bring out the underlying political reasons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Only by doing so is it possible to build and cement together a clearly defined revolutionary political tendency within the movement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Leadership<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reducing issues to the simple question of \u2018working class leadership\u2019 versus \u2018middle class leadership\u2019 is likewise insufficient. Of course we are in favour of working class leadership and worker\/youth control.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But especially when it comes to the unions, it is impossible to clarify the problem of leadership adequately by this method. The extent of reformist influences within the unions is undoubtedly attributable in large part to middle class intellectuals. But there is nothing automatic in the rise of the working class movement to a fully-formed and scientific revolutionary class-consciousness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trade unions, in fact, provide a certain \u2018natural\u2019 basis for economism and reformism, which can begin to take root among the membership even in South African conditions if these trends are not systematically combatted by conscious revolutionaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For this it is necessary to conduct a struggle on all levels including the level of ideas, theory, ideology. That in turn can only be effectively done in a paper which delineates itself clearly as a political tendency, which explains the consistency of its own scientific socialist system of ideas, and which identifies the historical roots and development of these ideas in contrast with all other tendencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Missing from the first three issues of the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 paper is any clear identification of reformism and economism on the one hand, or Stalinism on the other. Hence the paper lacks any political polemic against these dangerous misleading trends. They are instead criticised indirectly, through purely organisational and tactical arguments. We believe that will not suffice to defeat them.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When the comrades take up the ANC, they correctly call for the building of \u201ca mass ANC\u201d \u2013 and then add: \u201cWe will build it so that it really fights for the needs of workers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Very good \u2013 but in what way is the ANC failing to fight for the needs of workers? That must be explained politically, or the point is lost. Moreover, why not put the slogan of Inqaba: \u201cBuild a mass ANC on a socialist program\u201d? Is there any other basis on which the ANC can \u201creally fight for the needs of workers\u201d?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Especially when the ANC leadership is busy publicly dissociating itself from socialism \u2013 while at the same time, of course, insisting that tactics of compromise with capitalism are the best way of \u201creally fighting for the needs of workers\u201d \u2013 it is necessary for any conscious working class tendency in Congress to emphasise precisely the need for a mass socialist ANC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Clearer political analysis and criticism; greater attention to perspectives \u2013 these would add enormously in future to the already considerable strengths of the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 paper.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Particularly if this phase of relative ebb lasts for some time (as is possible), the emphasis would have to be placed on political argument and discussion of lessons of the last period \u2013 or comrades could shout themselves hoarse with calls for \u2018unity\u2019 and \u2018action\u2019 in an effort to propel the movement immediately to a higher level.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Due attention to perspectives \u2013 constant sober analysis of the phase through which the movement is passing \u2013 is not an optional \u2018extra\u2019 for revolutionaries, or some kind of intellectual luxury which real activists can\u2019t afford the time for. Theory, as Lenin put it, is a guide to action. More discussion of perspectives in the paper would in fact help the comrades to judge precisely, and then explain, what actions and tactics to put forward appropriate to the present phase, and so gain the most effective echo among the masses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

There are some other specific points we could take-up, but they are quite secondary to the main issues dealt with above.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We hope the \u2018UDF militants\u2019 will consider our comments in the spirit of a fraternal discussion among co-thinkers and comrades, which we hope can be carried on verbally and in writing in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The comrades\u2019 paper is an historic step forward in the movement. May it go from strength to strength!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u00a9 Transcribed from the original by the Marxist Workers Party (2021).<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Originally published in Inqaba No. 18\/19 (February 1986). The revolutionary struggles of black workers and youth these past 18 months have caused a turn by […]<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":960,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-2889","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"aioseo_notices":[],"acf":[],"_hostinger_reach_plugin_has_subscription_block":false,"_hostinger_reach_plugin_is_elementor":false,"brizy_media":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2889","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2889"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2889\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2905,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/2889\/revisions\/2905"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/pages\/960"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/marxistworkersparty.net\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2889"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}