Socialists and parliament Sharing the struggle, not the illusions
Socialist Outlook newspaper1990sPhil HearseTranscribed or corrected by hand from the printed page.
ONE of the aspects of the general election campaign which got little publicity was the 'don't vote' campaign run by Class War and other anarchist groups.
'If voting changed anything they'd abolish it', the title of Ken Livingstone's first book, reflects a common sentiment. After all, parliament is part of their system, which reduces the participation of working people in government to putting a cross on a piece of paper every five years.
Lenin in The State and Revolution called capitalist parliamentary democracy a 'diaphragm between the masses and politics'.
Different system
Revolutionary socialists argue for a different system of government which would put power in the hands of the working class through elected workers' councils, with delegates instantly recallable. It would be a system involving the active and regular participation of millions.
In addition, revolutionaries argue that the key struggle for the transformation of society is the direct class struggle between workers and bosses, and not parliamentary debates. So is parliament an important arena for socialist activity?
Actually there are two questions here. First whether who forms the government matters to socialists, and second what socialists should do if they have the possibility of being elected to parliament.
Both these questions are determined by the fact that whether or not revolutionary socialists consider parliament to be the key area of struggle, the masses see it as the site of official politics.
Government
Who forms the government, whether it is an openly bourgeois party or social democratic reformists, does matter. The most advanced workers always strive to elect a government based on the workers organisations.
Trotsky argued that socialists should 'share the struggle, but not the illusions'. This means fighting alongside reformist workers to elect a social democratic government, while warning that they will not carry out socialist policies.
Labour in power enables the workers to test out the reformist misleaders of the class. Socialists therefore are always in favour of a class vote.
Lenin, in his famous Left wing communism, an infantile disorder argued strongly against boycotting parliament or elections. He argued that Communists should use all the platforms that capitalist society gives for the expression of revolutionary views.
But this is quite different from playing by the rules of the parliamentary game.
Expose
The task of Marxists would be to take the class struggle into parliament, to utilise parliament to expose the capitalists and argue a revolutionary socialist position.
Revolutionary socialists in parliament, Lenin argued, should be 'tribunes of the people', utilising their position as MPs to mobilise support for struggles. This is exactly the sort of role which was played by Bernadette McAliskey when she was an MP, and by socialist MPs like Dave Nellist.
During the 1920s, when there were mass revolutionary Communist Parties in Germany, France and Italy, the Communists has strong parliamentary representation.
Discipline
But the deputies were subordinate to the party, and under its discipline. Their wages were paid to the party, and in return they were paid the wages of party full timers, pegged at levels of workers' wages.
There are no revolutionary socialists in parliament today, but there are left Labour MPs who utilise parliament in a similar way, as an arena for propaganda and mobilisation. This is a big gain for socialists and the left.
Lenin's 'Left Wing Communism' was written to attack groups in the Communist international who wanted to boycott both parliament and work in the reformist trade unions. He turned the argument of 'playing the bosses' game' on its head.
No, said Lenin, it is those who allow the bosses the monopoly of 'official' politics who are playing their game. Socialists should utilise parliament, while combating parliamentary illusions.
Could we get socialism through a left-wing parliamentary majority? In theory it is possible to get a militant left wing majority and pass sweeping anti-capitalist measures.
Coup
The task then would be to make them stick against the resistance and sabotage of the ruling class, including possible attempts at a military coup.
Anti-capitalist measures by a socialist-dominated parliament could only be imposed by a mobilised working class, fighting to establish its own power. In that process, it would inevitably create a system of democratic participation and representation far more democratic than anything ever seen in the realm of parliamentary democracy.