share-owning democracy'. Thus it is a massive blow to Thatcherism ideolo- gically. Millions of people, including the rcalities of capitalism. At the same time. Bryan Gould and Neil Kinnock living standards is inevitable. complex,
N the word crisis' is a combination of Socialists now have it in their hands to strengthen the movement in a quali- tative way if they seize the opportun ity. If not, then the horizon is clouded with dangers for socialism and the and international scale, as what has happened over the past lew weeks in the world's financial markets. The crisis has shown that those who stand against the irrationality of capitalism The Chinese written character for those for "danger" and opportunity" working class. is much belter poised to make the radical solutions. There are signs that after Thatcher's third clectoral vic- National Front could also grow as a result of the slump, especially if the left fails to take advantage of its op- portunities. But at the moment the left OF course, the scientific theories of then those who put forward bold and tury the left is beginning to reorganise itself, both in the Labour Party and beyond. Far right currents like the marxism which have consistently ex- posed the contradictions of the capi- Thatcherite share-owning mytholngy. the livelihood and well-being of mil- dible and popular: and of course this Indeed what has happened is going to lions of people, in the hands of a tiny It will make anti-capitalist propagan- du and explanations much more cre- will have its biggest impact in the have been made to look pretty stupid in their headlong pursuit of sub- make millions of people question the rationality of a financial system which puts the world economic order. and handful of immensely rich financiers. SOCIALST OUTLOOK #04 Navember December 1987- labour movement.
After the TUC and Labour Party conference Will the left fight back? saw a huge attack by the right wing, Chesterfield shows the basis is there for a new AFTERCHESTERFIELD sir Bullcoh surge of the left. PETE FIRMIN reports. Dave Pacer/Socialat Outlook strong Socialist Conference in Labour Party were followed Labour Party Chesterfield. by the 2000- conference conterence The TUC While the and the
from the poor and the dispossesse. who using half-baked pop Gaitskell floated it and is still rubbish when much more lightweight figures likr The hissing and booing which greeted speech is indicative of a general SOCIALIST OUT|OCK As 4 November/December 1987 undertaken in the nest two years: Tis words move fundamentally to the right and accepi some of the basics of That- There is no doubt that this is one of party since the attempi by Gaitskell ti Indeed, the present situation has some Kinnock is saying, as Gaitskell did, chet an affluent' working class. and that we socinlogy about the demise of the work- , which was rubbish when mated by the policy review which will be aim. to quote trade and industry spor kesperson John Smith, is to review the the most prolound debates inside the have therctore to shift our appal away abandon clausc i in the early 1960s interesting parallels with that debme. the working class is now, in is majority. Ken Livingstone and Sharon Atkin address fringe meetings at Labour Party conference - Kinnock and Gould spout it. whole stance of the party" cherite philosophy. tension of public ownership, and indeed This operation Kinnock is arc a minoriy * To overthrow the democratic reforme party structure by attacking the LPYS, ing power more widely - a fatuous notion at the best of times, but looking distinctly sick after the collapse of the ing to the reslection of MPs, via the interoetion of the electoral college ver: * To seize control of every aspect of thie Labour Party women's conference, clos- any pledge of even renationalisation of ownership are was clearly claborated by Bryan Gould when he supported water. privatised industries, to replace case ie What the new forms of social made in the party, especially those relat with talk of 'new forms of social owner- share ownership as a means of spread economy and nationalisation were hardly addressed by the *the key questions of the ing down Labour Wcekty and so on. but Ramada Man dominates the proceedings main left leaders sion of tone member, one vote stock market. thing to do with unilateralism and in make it a simple multi-lateralism. In this all traces of its influence. A simple list of the leadership's objectives will show • To progressively redefine 4: "non- nuccar defence policy away from any- receiving some assistance from the soft * To abandon any commitment 1o ex- endeavour, it must he said, they are appeal to the (mythical) 1100-a-weck docker, were only the tip of the iceberg right wing's arrack and the boldness and caught some people by surprise. Tr aims at nothing less than crushing the left and Kinnock's gem about the necessity to: In elfect, they plan to roll back all the policy and organisational gains made by the left since 1979. The crocity of the scope of their proposed policy changes - that is the apt phrase uxed by the left at the Labour policies and principles which Kinnock party: Bryan Gould's speech extolling thie virtues of share ownership, and Neil Party conference to describe the new and Gould are trying to fist on the left, from the likes of Joan Ruddock. of the Icadership's operation: 'SUR-THATCHERISM" what is involveil:
Tureaucracy did nur bace itall their own was The continued willingness of the working class in fight back against at- locks on jolo and conditions was re swaa on incrcasinglv de luine shune Doership it is going to be afluent working class and themon eh ot Soneihr a sime-owning democract" harder mobtel cononen nol deus mone Bine done bonde kadership. 9n the ther band there as abson doobe thae Shat sus nant at the conferener
. their fected in the deleats which the confe: handline of News International. no- strike deals, opposition co the new round reme plattorm sulfered lese wo should por anderesnmane the push through their policy resure, whih deraumagion of phe party leadrship to despie beme posenced to contenent 1s generalle opposed to in lemiceship's nonbe sas to sections of the conferenos seen these whethenther, tight be sotpe truch in m1
ol ami union lewa — and indeed in the fight akei onto the floor ot congress lis In looking arthe prospecisfor the lelt. Scargill anl Macrcadies With dis vents rucias not neuls si dramiție melle Talimr Pare conte: estgleport, will hose policy implica Goris right arros le TennE. Etc lettis goune tondate to fight harci in an Ideological bach to esplain here Kink mit Gould an wrone. Bur chr delire jeliols to be colonied In che
aure light of the deepening anlacks of ihe Labour leadership, it is necessars to ince it represented a contration of tie dritt towards thi right Barthe union perice of conomie deprissin mid chete sElbe sick charkor raser Insi TS Novences Decente (947 SOLAISTOUTICION pericd öf
the labour movement is just abour pol- This sounded to many like a declar ockism. Whether it was or not, such a Thisovas a correct apprach; and it is One of the things which dominated the second Ill ol the conference was an understanding that the mock market crash heralded important changes in the which the lett operatescand will tend to undermine the Another positive aspect of the confer- Cu- was 1 further conference is to be held in May, and regional and local report- backs and conferences will be held in One final poin abour Chesterficid needs mentioning — the major speech by Ken Livingstone. In his speech to rejected the robions olten put forward by Lony Renn and nihers, that the fight in *Elus van sou stone, if cou are led by someone like war dearly needs waging belore mexi one which noods to be counterposet to any approach on the left which sticks obsessively In internal Labour Party beginning there ought to lie continued ationcut war ngainst Kinnock and Kimm year's conlerene considers the Jeader have noialist policies. asked Living was the decling that the which credibility of Kinoskism. of socialists cies. nor personalities. miany areas betore then. structures and cauctises. political situation in: Ramsay MacDonald?" ships policy review • ordination. CHESTEREIEID ener who are in the lasi analysis prepared in apartheid demonstratin, tevealed a fightback and to reassert basic socialist success of the conference was the fact Party, together with those trom the cracke 'Red Flag' It must be said that here is a tation within black sections and among if two thousand socialists in Chesterhield in Octaber was a boost for the left. A large proportion of the crnference were rank and hic trade union add Talmur Party members, The conference revealed a deep hostility to the moves of the Labour Icadership n push the party 1o the right. As one delegate said: this conference has drawn • line across the let" — a line of those fight back against Kinnockis k The big turnout at the conterence: despite the clast with the marional anti- new mood of wanty to organise for a principles. Cue of the reasons for the hardhe organsens songht To bring to- gether militants from inside the Calnur sons, campaigos — and indeed social- ise acrivists not in the Tabour Pariy. protests right up to the singing of the developing procoss of political chfferen against those who in the end are pre 'the Chesterfield conference was a boost for the left* pared to go along with it. women in the party. The conferetice AFTER Arrhe Laboar Pace conference arsell steatroller were the most oppressed sec- by retusing to be tobbod off several times during conference and continuing their women amal black lock at the resistance at the Labour Pany conlerone and at what happened at the subsequent Chesterfield Socialist Betore the Labour conference some members of the Labour Co-ordinating Committee (ECOl stocring committee and of the Labour Lef Liain put out a alirning left wing policies. Prominent Livingstone, Ann Penifor, Joan Rud dock. Vladimir Derer and Pecer Main. This starement was a good initiative; whuch infurinted the right wing of the LCC and left the editor of Morom Today "protoundly depressed". Its main weak- ness was that is reiained simply at the level of demands on a future Labour government. and the consequences berr and now for labour movement action the response of the left, and especially the sott lett. was very weak. The key questors ol the econorny and delence of nationalisation were hardly addressed at Tust as in 1986. the sections of the Labour Party lean willing to lir down and be crushed by the rightward-moving people. Women showed their restience were hot immediately obvious. all by the main lett leaders. lourteen-punt tions of the class Conference:
maybe E500 worth. If so. he has gambled a year's cquivalent of €10 = week at the bookics: his return on that investment may cqual one good win on an outsider. His shareholding is in- significant in relation to the stakes of Ramada Man: fact or fiction? E261: if Ron Todd is right about the £400 a week figures, there can't be Even the top ten per cent of all male workers fall £50 a week short of Todd's many votes to be won there. ric remains of "Pirdown Man" genc- DECADES AGO, experts and commen- tators were taken in by a skilful fake. The discovery of the supposed prehisto- cated all kinds of wild theories on evo-
SOUALSTOUTIOOK na-1 NovomberDacember 199/ Behind the defeatist mythology of socialist, even Tory-voting section of Old-style union bureaucrats like Eric Hammond have always reflected their prejudices. But duced a bag of bones to back up the conviction as Cinderella's coach at five the banks and trusts — and he gets no voice in company policies. While his share income is welcome spending does it compare with the share income of the capitalist class. If be loses his job he will have to sell the shares to avoid Ramada Man lies an uncomfortable fact: there has always been a non- the working class, particularly its more now the trendy Labour line is to allow At least Piltdown Man's creatur pro- prank: Ramada Man carries as much money, he can't live on it: in no way this backward rump to dictate policy. hassle from social security. privileged layers. past midnight • most well-known have been Fleet Street jobs have been axed, provincial news barons are booting out unionised print- NGA members are learning how flimsy Ramada Man also owns a housc; after Tory policies have stifled council hon- choice. Bur do mortgages stop workers challenging capitalism? Thousands of long strike to defend their communities and the industry they depend upon: millions of Labour votes have always come from owner-occupiers appalled Of course some manual workers are known to carn €400 a week or more: printworkers. But national newspaper workers, and thousands of socat and has been their prosperity, which rested he probably has little miners with mortgages joined a year- Ramada Man owns a few shares — on trade union strength. by Tory policies. exposed, the Kinnock leadership is at- tempting to palm off a new myth. We Renaissance Hotel, at which Kinnock Descriptions of this new species vary. According to Ron Todd, he is a How many Ramada Men are there? per cent of manual workers is only Now, years alter Piltdown Mau was Man, after and his camp followers held court dur- docker on 1400 a week, (rumours that Todd was referring to Brian Nicholson have not been denied) and has a holi- But by common consent Ramada We know there are not many dockers left. Latest government figures show that average weekly pay for the top ten Man is male, owns a house, a few ing this year's party conference. shares, and feels well-off. can call this *Ramada day home in Marbella. 10
shares in, Of the initial shareholders in This is often used as a sop to push restructuring well- orgatused workers. The shares issued on lavourabie terms to the workers in privatised industrics are pne examplo. change tor massive runs in pay which *Your pay is cur now, but the corpora- tion will recover its proficability and eventilly voo'll do well out of it is the message. In these cases. worker share ownership is a sbort-termi expedient for Another is the issue of shares 'in ex- have been negotiated hy loss-making US corporations such as TWA and Chrysler, Share-owning democracy? relatively duraging agaatst nicasures through SHARE-OWNING shares in, Of the initial shareholders in cent have sold out. In British Gas a third sold out in the first four months in spite of voucher and share ofter incentives to The large number of sharcholders in the privatised companics, including among their own workers, does not in jority of shares are already in the hands of the financial institutions: in thc privatised half of BT only 24 per cent of are now held by small shareholders, while 64 per cent are held by only 340 owners, mainly institutions any way enhance democracy. The ma- cxample, 65 British Airways, for retain shares. ficial proposals for "new forms of social for: this: tune On the same day as: BRYAN GOLD'S Labour Party con- ference speech calling for a re-valuation of Labour s attitude to share ownership by workers was rightly met with con- But in fact the Labour leadership was touting this idea before the clecrinn. John Smith and David Blunkett included worker share ownership in 1985, and it was an im- portant element of the Greater London even sections of the liard left have fallen ownership as a major part of their of- Lacking any clear economic strategy Enterprise Board's policy before that. #derable hostility:
from the present government's policy of Workery share ownership or profir ment in the long term, by Mexibly link- ing wages to profits and by cocating an junking cooperation with trade union leaders and smashing union organisa- tion: But a policy of management- on management's terms — can have big advantages for capital, lowering labour turnover and atmosphere of "cooperation' in the firm. A cooperative policy may seein a far cry absenteessen anc inreasing the prality sharing schemes can also help manage of production and productivity: labour cooperation — the employers and firms. Even if the shares were equal- entire population, there are no mechanisms for and determining company A member of the rank and looks at the GOUGH JAMIE filofax? ly distributed throughout the Guukt's proposal was characteristical- ferent forms of worker share ownership; owuership of shares in general, and ownership of shares in the worker's own firm. The first of these has been pro- Gould's speerh, campaign group MP Brian Sedgemore proposed that a third of public companies shares should be transferred to a workers" inest, with the supposed result that some workers ly vague, and muskiled together two dit- moted by the government through the marketing of shares in privatesril: in- dustries in an unprecedentedly wide would becume millionaires overnight"
to the Labour and trade unson leadership since ir offers a new excuse for class collabora- ton: they can appear as representatives management and the midwives of new, harmonious industrial While sharc-ownership schemes are always a risky option, they may appear are a danger for the working Share ownership tends to increase divisions between workers within m- dustries by weakening the role of na- attractive to workers in particular firms. This can be very attractive if enlightened! das a a whole But they relations. What effect does share ownership have on the new share owners? Con- trary to Mercum Today's contention, and contrary to the suggestion in Kinnock's conference speech, buying shares in either require or encrurage a conversapn valucs, All that is necessary is 1100 of savings and a desire Where workers have rctained their privatised industries does not necessarily inconsistencies of Bryan Gould's *share-owning democracy? i0 Thatcherite? to double it. a huge bill: the give-away prices necessary to ensure a wade take-up have government has forfeited a prof ofover With them lavish handouts, and the plications, it is only surprising that mor twenty per cent of adults now own scale. This way of sciling shares has had the aim of making remationalisarion more difficult and for this Thatcher (and British capital) bave been willing to pay barn scarrely half the companics real valuc. On BT and British Gas alone, the people have not bought the shares. Only low threshold sct for minimum sharr ap-
11 dional collective bargaining am strug- firms, with long sanding, often skilled benetiting The degree of influence on manage- ment that may accompany worker share through a pooled trust) tends to draw workers more strongly into helping their firme to compete, deepening the com- petitive anarchy of capitalist organisa- tion: It is not a weak form of industrial is no democrary in share exercised gle Trends to increase divisions within planning. Ie is the opporte uf planning. ownership (especially WOrkery disproportionately tended to highlight, is ownership of shares this is esschtially an alternative form of saving to the building sociely. Te is a way of keeping the value of moncy for Juture ase, not the accumulation of capital. Saving has been undertaken by the belter off parts of the British work- ing class for the last 150 vears and is hardly an invention of Thatcher. For the average new shareholder, the protit, in the form of dividend income, is small, A potentially much more important torm of share ownership from a political point of view, and the one Labour has khares in the workers' own company. 825-100 а усаг. owners were unskilled ant semi-skilled workers. There is little indication that shares, compared with seven per cent in Clearly most shares have been bougiu by the middle class and a comparatively small mumber of better off workers. As these completcly exceptional share viles have whetted the appetite of many of the new share owners fur normal specula- tion in shares, despite the steadily rising prices on the stock exchange of the last money, tany people have cashed their of last ycar only four per cent of share SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 4 November/December 1987 having doubled Morcover,
anti-abortion lobby to curb, and major breakthrough for women. three million will have had legal By the twentieth anniversary of have seen many attempts of the abortions. Those