BERT RAMELSON - REPLY TO BIRCHALL
It is good to see Comrade Birchall going back to primary
sources to correct some of the errors made in his original review of the
Ramelson biography. But on some points
he remains annoyingly obtuse. It is clear from my previous posting that the
proof reading error refers solely to a failure to delete a small sub-clause
containing a wrong date and clearly out of place in the text. It has nothing to do with the context of the
Ramelson article referred to which in our judgement is an all round critique of
the Labour left in 1958, not simply or mainly a comment on the “obsession with
unilateralism”. Of course by 1960, in
self-criticism, the CND leadership conceded that it had underemphasised the
importance of multi lateral measures such as Britain’s membership of NATO, US
bases and Test Ban Treaty.
On the CND marches it is clear that the Daily Worker (as
Birchall now concedes), the British Peace Committee, the CP (particularly in
the unions) and the YCL, with youth and students, played important parts in the
mobilisation for Aldermaston. But as
Birchall says this should not underplay the role played by other organisations
and social forces.
On the Pentonville 5 Birchall misunderstands the arguments
made in the book and by Darlington and Lyddon.
In such situations, as the book makes clear, it is the immediate actions
taken by stewards at workplace level which are crucial. The CP and LCDTU were able to use their extensive
networks in a broad range of industries to generate a speedy response. The LCDTU letter calling for solidarity was,
in this context, a formality.
No comments:
Post a Comment