Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economicsMacassey, Lynden Livingston
History
Labour policy—false and true : $b A study in economic history and industrial economics
Macassey, Lynden Livingston
Industrial policy -- Great Britain; Labor economics -- Great Britain; Labour Party (Great Britain)
The whole of the Labour argument for this official inauguration of
direct action turned on the assumption that the Bolshevik Government
was standing in a white sheet and contemplated no ulterior threat to
Polish independence. Labour accepted Bolshevik professions to this
effect with credulous alacrity. Then came the amazing _dénouement_. It
turned out that, with characteristic Bolshevik duplicity, there had
been deleted from the draft of the proposed peace terms, communicated
to England, certain vitally important articles going to the root of
Polish independence, which, however, were inserted in that presented by
the Bolsheviks to the Poles at Minsk on August 19. The doctored English
version, after specifying the strength to which the Polish Army was to be
cut down, provided that all arms over and above those required for the
needs of the army as so reduced, “as well as of the Civic Militia,” were
to be handed over to Russia. In the Minsk version, the Civic Militia was
the crux of the terms; it was to be recruited from one class only, _the
workers_; to be in strength four times that of the regular Polish army,
and armed; in other words, a Red Army in Poland. This exactly enforced
Section 8 of Lenin’s Third International Constitution, which stipulates
for the “disarmament of the bourgeoisie and the arming of the workers
to defend Communism until Capitalism shall finally have been abolished.”
There was in truth at no time any argument from Poland to support direct
action. The reason for its adoption was far more accurately stated by
Mr. Robert Williams, the Secretary of the National Transport Workers’
Federation, a leading member of the notorious Council of Action. In
the _Daily Herald_ for August 25, 1920, he is reported to have said as
follows:
“We felt that with the policy of Mr. Lloyd George, which sways
to and fro according to events, we were menaced with war from
the moment that the Poles were in peril. Together with several
friends we drew up a manifesto which even the Conservatives
among the Labour leaders signed, because they recognized
clearly that they could no longer oppose the advanced elements
_which had for so long insisted on the employment of direct
action_.”
This recalls Lord Bacon’s aphorism on faction: “It is often seen that a
few that are stiff do tire out a greater number that are more moderate.”
The extremists had been struggling for ten years to establish the
adoption of direct action under all circumstances as Labour’s normal
weapon of attack. They succeeded because the chief anxiety of Labour
leaders, whether advancing at the head or running at the heels of their
flock, is always, at any price, to secure or conserve solidarity.
Setting-up of Local Soviets
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account