SocialistAction 1983–88

The paper of the Socialist League, formerly the International Marxist Group, 1983–88

Rebecca Johnson

Socialist Action No. 7, 28 April 1983 · p. 7 of the scan · 802 words

The scan: 007-apr-28-1983-SA-UK.pdf (PDF, Marxists Internet Archive, opens at this page)

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Apple Vision OCR) from a scan of a newspaper page, and the page was cut into articles by machine, at the headlines found by their type size. Nothing has been corrected: expect misread words, text from a neighbouring article, and titles that are the machine reading of the headline, some of them only fragments. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: headline found by type size in the OCR geometry (split_tabloid.py); 3-5 of 7; machine-segmented newspaper page; uncorrected Vision OCR.

page 7 of the scan

the general election as Life on Earth' candidates. your view on that!

One of the problems of people standing as independents is that they tend misleadingly censory vote suggest that the the credit side you get the advantages of the election address and the canvassing of people on the doorstep But the most central point is that while in the past there was no major party that had a unilateralist position, game when the Labour Party has a unilateralst policy fudged. This makes the whole. situation very different to in the past.

How did this question come up in the first wave' of This used to come up all the time 25 years ago. Standing candidates was always a hot Issue. because didn't want to lose votes for Labour even though it wasn't Some people like the Direct Action Committee against nuclear war around this by advocating a refusal to vote - the spoiling of ballot papers if there was not a unilateralist canWhat's ly debatea, tor similar reasons.

THIS can The one campaign for cam- dent candidates Committee.

People like

1964 wider basis including Vietnam Race Relations. stood Meanwhile issue of Vietnam.

than 200 votes. unilateralist.

got damental platform didate. But this again was always hotindepen- in was INDEC the Nuclear Michael Craft stood in Twickenham for this group Richard Gott, John Gittings and Stuart Hall supported him.

Some of the same people formed a called the Radical Alliance, which fought some seats on tne war in and on the white paper on against the Foreign Secretary Michael Stewart in Gott stood against Kevin MacNamara in It was quite an imDORaIL Cacola because leadie could have deprived Labour of its small majority. In the event he got less In Fulham there was a Communist cancidale and we naa tne same run- we were saying the same things about nuclear disarmament, Vietnam and race relations, so it was a bit silly. I got a rather poor These campaigns had some value that they were waged Labour candidates who were totally before unilateralist policy. I think it is now a different situation. After 1970 general election I joied the Labour Party because of the nuclear disarmament policies adopted.

I'm now on the Labour CND executive, and we're concerned about this is used against aD by case used against Labour right wing. I can see that there perhaps a case for standing nuclear disarmament candidate against people like Callaghan, who is so remote from being unilateralist especially if there is no possibility of losing him his seat.

Some of the women who want to stand would say that Labour promises are one thing, wnat wey will do l power is something else. In that case tney are not really standing agamst a party which is thoroughly and unequivocally unilateralist, will produce a government which is unilateralist without question. against I think everybody in Labour CND's executive this. but this seems an argument for the being in the Labour Party to make stick.

Labour CND's pressure has led to the campaign document being not as bad as it might have been.

joined the Labour recalled back in 1960 went unilateralist for a short while, we in CND let things go back again, And it seems to me that's an argument for getting Labour in power committed to unilateralism, happened before, standing candidates even where the candidate is not unequivocally unilateralist. which James Jane's case.

extremely conscious of We think that I'm After a great deal of thought I because I when Labour by default, SO away After Consequently it seemed to me imsure it retained its unilateralist policy.

which has not and therefore not against Labour about it.

Callaghan's, was adjacent t Jane Hutt's, who is a Labour Part candidate, a unilateralist, a femini and a member of Women for Life o Earth. She thought she might damag ut you feel quite happy in Her anding against the Labour Part Yes, I feel quite comfortable about it going to speak on Labour Pan Party is the best hope but I do no trust them fully. They must be prodd ed kicking and screaming into twentieth centurv through peace an disarmament. If you're standing, as am, in a safe Tory seat you can rais issues that the Labour Party may no be able to make such a noise about.

the injunction th Greenham women I got the front pag in the local paper. That enabled me t get to people on disarmament and th peace issue that the Labour Party can didate wouldn't have been able to.

DOLES politicisation which I strongly believ in. I said to Lady Olga Maitland in m debate with her on T.V. that 1 wa glad she'd realised there was a threa and I'd hope she'd become politicise

← Pat ArrowsmithThe origins of May Day →

Something wrong on this page?