not going to be able to whip themselves up into a lather of enthusiasm for the coming European elections in June.
will remember Market referendum Labour's Wilsonite right wing joined forces with Tory premier Heath, and the Liberals, to force through a ratification of Britain's: membership of the EEC. If we are hostile to the EEC and its institutions, then why should we bother European parliament?
The official course will campaign ot not be based on the demand for withdrawal from the EEC. Stan Newens, former MP candidate for Central London summed up the official recently: 'Whatever your own position, we have to recognise that 1970s we lost the debate. And we never said that if Britain did go into the Common Market we would let all the British the SCaLD parliament be taken by Tories'.
manifesto will fudge the issue of withdrawal, and stress Bridemands for ComLalll s Market So he first question the left nas to answer is wicket le •should continue to oppose • British membership of the market, and whether this is a viable basis for a campaign.
In our view there is no question that opposition should be For the Labour left in the 1970s battles against during the 1975 Common pounding the streets to elect Labour members of the maintained. Fighting the championing queengEngChandioulls land' against 'internaEurope', but of tionalist recognising that the market means of strengthening the Euroruling call economically, politically militarily against the working class.
The Common Market is the institution which is used to co-ordinate economic 'rationalisation' steel closures, mine closures, food price rises and the rest - agalnst Ine working It is an essential component growing military colwhich aims to strengthen imthe frameperlalsi work of NATO. Socialists should not be neutral on the of 'Hands up all those who want to stay in the Common Market' alliances by the bourgeoisies.
There is no contradiction whatever between being opposed to the EEC, and running an campaign to the withdrawal basis. campaign on a withdrawal platform would have allowed mass hostility to the EEC to be expressed. pend two central candidates like Les Huckfield will be standing on an expect anti-EEC platform, even if this is not the position of the official Labour campaign. In most areas ol course the campaign wi note ol withdrawal can the left deal with this situation?
The temptation of left activists avoid participation in the election should be avoided for two reasons tions will provide a test of First, the elecHaSs overall record of especially if the miners strike is continuSecond, the opportunities to argue the anticase will be wnaleve position of the local candidate.
The general message of the need to fight the Tories JOHN HARRIS must be taken into ine cal ball Just because the elections bear the official imprint 'European', no one is prevented from protest vote against the full range of ing Moreover meetings and canvassing, the lett will have every opstress position to the EEC, the need for withdrawal.
The 1983 general election represented a high point for the Tories, and an artificially low vote for Lavour. The election can be utilised as a alternative to the hesitasituation.
The opposite temptation abstaining participation in the elections Dar ticipation in the elections - should also be avoided however. Neil Kinnock This LO. ordinating Committee Hank-Luaus alc attempting wholesale 'теeducation' of the party on a position of reconciliation io EEC membership. Like the other 'Eurosocialists' the fundamental orientation of the Kinnock leadership is towards closer in. tegration of the European movement The answer of course is the supporters Israel.
economic aominalon c the United States.
If the new realism of the Kinnock leadershir towards the EEC is to be fought, it means full participation by the left in the June elections, but on the workers struggles austerity, on the basis opposition to the missiles plans of the European im perialists, and on the basis of opposition to the capitalist Commor Market. No the capitalist market, for socialist Europe!
WHEN is a trade union not a trade union?
when it's the Histadrut, the Israeli Jewish labour federa• tion. Despite the myths assiduously spread by the Israeli state, the Histadrut is one of the fundamental supports of Zionism, and one of the main employers in When is a Labour Party not a labour party? When it's the Israeli Labour Party, the party of Moshe Dayan and Golda Meir, the party of the European Jewish establishment Zionist party which has nothing to do with the labour movement or The Israeli Labour Party is however, affiliated to the British Labour Party through its British atcastimo voter through the "socialist societies' section of the electoral college The links between the British labour movement and Zionism will be one of the main topics discussed at the joint PSC-LMCP labour movement consupport for Israel have dominated the British labour movement. The myths of 'socialist' kibbutz, and 'progressive' Israel have only been challenged in the last few years. The Zionist movement has carefully exploited collective Western guilt' over the Jewish holocaust, and the accusation that anti-Zionism equals anti-semitism.
The Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982 should have dispelled many of the Zionist myths. But the plight of Palestinian workers in Israel itself and in the occupied territories, Gaza and the West Bank, is little known in the British labour movement.
The 19 May conference will hear Palestinian trade union speakers, and initiate a discussion on links and solidarity with Palestinian labour strug gles. Out of the conference it is hoped to organise a labour movement delegation to Palestine, a tour and prepare the the question of Conference on Palestine
----- pull-quotes -----
fought some of its most bloody British membership of the Common Market. Many
photo. Tory attacks on the work-