demand the next move. Panic al round.
'War games', does not have an entirely believable story But it's close enough to reality to be chilling reminder of the precarious state of the 'nuclear balance' irrationality of the nuclear 'Is this a game allis tale or is it real?' asks comwith its youthful central characters and backdrop of young love. But that doesn't intrude if you're Cosmonated but mated by computers, terrified thermonuclear war like thriller. 'Strange game' says. the computer 'that neither side can win'. See, they're cven Inventing compulels cleverer than people. (John Bradham 1983, 113 minutes) future with a line like this?
Hor tive. well-written chapters he details the history of the Labour left and its relations with the right. There it is in all its horror and if you do not have time to read Ralph Miliband's Parliamentary Socialism this useful short sharp introductory guide to the inadequacies of reformism.
But then the snag. His conclusions are about as much use to a British marxist as a pair of snow skis Bedouin. All he comes forward with at the end is an exhortation to bulld the revolutionary party here and now'.
Review by Bob Pennington This apparently can be done by 'not pretending to be stronger than we passinil attended grand reso mons ward meetings capturing positions without any real base and building every real workers' strug gle we can find, no matter tiny, arguing unambiguously for our revolutionary politics with the small minority who will listen.?
This Socialist Party of Great Britain-type au" proach, which owes more to Fabian gradualism than it does to the traditions of the early Third Internanever going lead to social revolution.
Revolutionar • socialism is only going to go or the agenda when million of people are convinced that things can't go on in the same way. And they are equally convinced that the reformist organisations can't deliver the goods.
This means mass break with the right-wing The author adominance in the party's DOWC suructure from their great weight in the working class itself. They organise and affect the day-to-day lives of millions of workers.' How right he is. So the 64-dollar question is how are the workers going to break with reformism? Pete Goodwin suggests it is going to be done by a revolutionary group from a never-ending succession of strikes, where presumably growing number of workers wil learn that their leaders are just a bunch of traitors.
But the unions are no1 made up of, on one side, a perfidious leadership whose task is to sell out and on the other side a file who straining at the leash to overthrow capitalism just waiting tor some marxist to come and show them the way. The majori. ty of workers think that capitalism, apart few blemishes is OK is why they often give their support to the right ving leaders the Labour leaders.
Even the activist wing in the labour movement is overwhelmingly left reformist. They may be more militant than the average rank and file member but they still reckon reform not revolution the answer. This acceptance of rerormisu elabici right wing to get away with their policies , oI class col laboration. But it is inese workers that marxists have to convince.
Hidden away in a corner somewhere not • millions unsullied revolutionary workers to whom reformism is a dirty word. That fact grasped by the 3rd International in the early days when it urged the young British Communist build a bridge to the reformist workers and this led to the formation of the Minority Movement the National Left-Wing MoThey knew that They the marxists could only win the leadership of decisive sections of the working 11 they united action and common WOrk snow te retorms workers that there were practical solutions the crisis which needed dependent: working class action.
----- pull-quotes -----
PETE GOODWIN'S pamphlet Is there a future for the Labour left? made me ask the question has the Socialist Workers Party who published it got any