Correspondence [Committee of 100]
To the Editor,
With reference to News in Review (December 1964). Some of your criticisms of the apolitical attitude of the Committee of 100 are probably justified. But by their courage they have had more success in a couple of years in getting ideas through to the general public than the SPGB has had in a lifetime.
As you say, the Committee is tackling subjects only remotely connected with the Bomb, perhaps (with a little encouragement—not abuse) the next development will be Direct Action for Peace and Socialism.
BILL EVETT, Secretary West Ham YCND.
There is really no great problem in “getting ideas through to the public “, provided we are not particular about what sort of ideas they are.
The SPGB is small, not because we have not worked hard to propagate our ideas, but because the working class does not support Socialism.
The progress of the Socialist movement depends upon the growth of political consciousness among the working, class. The Committee of 100, like the other organisations which stand for capitalist reform, have not helped in this. They have only spread continued their own confusion among the working class at large.
In our December issue, we drew attention to an example of this. The anti-nuclear movement once said that the only issue worth concentrating on was nuclear disarmament; now they are chasing up and down the old, well trodden blind alleyways of reform. And still their original object is as far away as ever.
A movement like that could never stand for Socialism. Mr. Evett, for example, adds his own little bit of confusion to the rest by referring to “Direct Action for Peace and Socialism”.
The only hope lies in a party which remains steadfast in its Socialist principles, and does its best to convince people like Mr. Evett of the futility of demonstrating for capitalist reform instead of working for the system’s overthrow.
EDITORIAL COMMITTEE