From this sectarianism flowod, in turn, the ar titude to internal democracy Tf lible Issue really come before big ones then even a smal difference in an organisation must be a funda. mental threat to its proletarian be. Any person who came forward with a differcoce get something done, or was actually quite wrong on same tactic or other, but was ob viously the reincarnation of Burnham, Shacht man, Marlov, Kautsky, Stalin or someone els troin the gallers of revolutionary anti-heroes LABOUR STRATEGY When, on occasion, some rocalcitrant mem bers did want to cuphasise the importance of bie Questons. such as the Labour Party, women's oppression, or Ireland, they were trested vith denson soe conlchot Worker are not interested in these questions', was the stable response. in any case there 1simes Li verted attention from the leele questions Those who challenged such a view were 'petty hourgepis academics, teminists, third-world ines etc. If they persisted they bad to be ex ciuded from the proletarian party The results of this tradition were devastating They justified splits, rejected undertaking uni ted action, trampled on internal democracy and Heca te Bras cac central poates questod confronting the belt. This tradition can he pro perly delined as national economist secarian m. les ideological expression was 'look afl be little chings and the big things will look af tbemnscives.
For a revolutionary left brought up in th tradition, the period which opened up in 1968 Last week Social at how the crisi affected the ref left. We challe which they gave solutions they o part of the art argues that the p found much of th and led to important working class victories i 1972-74, scered to confire all its prejudices After all most of the steugeles were narrow i when compared to other countries Four-filths of the days lost in strikes were ol wage disputes. The mais, overtly struggles were almost all connected with tradi union rights: the struggie against the Industria Relations Act, the freeing of the Five and th muners agaiost wage controls. There were non of the mass struggles and strikes against repre sion, major convulsions over issues such as di vorce and abortion, collapie of regime Aroupo colonial wars, formation ar possi bility of Popular Frontist and ocher excel governments such as occurred i Portugal, France, Italy, or Spain In spote of chese Limitations, however, ll workers" movement appeared to be acluevin pectacular successes. The Industrial Relacion Bill sens smashed, the Heath Government w brought down by the miners, and living sta dards actually west up. Dido't that prove tha the little thines' governed the "big things'?
Of course, there were the pessimists wh were not totally satisfied with this conchision They were arguing chat these victories were wo Hot because of the advanced character of the struccie, but because of the exceptionally las ourable social celarionship of forces facing the British working class. They painted our tha struggles of this character aloue were not suffis lent for a political leap forward. They argue that the British workers confronted a skillfu and powertul ruting class which could utilise it political strenath to overpower the workin class's polilical weakness. All these ohjection were dismissed our of hand by the bulk of th left. What mattered was not this "intellectualis rublish but "bread and hutter questions'. Ebi strugeles in the period 1968-74 re-inforced thi economism of the hulk of the far lent Thi major crisis which it confronts today is the d