by Jacquie Henderson
Labor Challenge,
August 24 1970
On July 26 five leading members of the
Saskatchewan-based Committee for a Socialist Movement announced to a
provincial meeting of the CSM that they were leaving that organization
and joining the Young Socialists/ Ligue des Jeunes Socialistes. The move
came after months of debates within the CSM, an organization of radicals
that attempted to contain the many points of view of its members by
adopting no clear program or orientation.
Richard Thompson, one of the five, explained the
development in this way: "The phenomenon of CSM, a broad, catchall
organization of "revolutionaries" was only possible during a certain
period of Saskatchewan politics. Without any doubt that period is over.
The mixture of different political views: left social democrat,
Stalinist, new left, and quasi-Trotskyist could not continue beyond a
certain point. It was the attempt to continue such an alliance that led
CSM into stagnation and inactivity."
Thompson is well known in Saskatchewan and on campuses
across the country. He was once an Ontario organizer for the Canadian
Union of Students and before that he was a director of the Company of
Young Canadians. He first became involved in radical politics through
the 1965 "Selma sit-in" in Toronto in solidarity with the Black struggle
in the U.S. Later he went to Saskatchewan to work on the Student Union
for Peace Action's Neestow Project which sent students onto the Indian
reserves to do community organizing. Thompson was one of the founders of
CSM and was a CSM candidate for alderman of Saskatoon last fall. He has
been active in politics on the University of Saskatchewan campus in
Saskatoon.
Thompson, for some years previous a known critic of the
Young Socialists from a "new left" perspective, described his evolution
in a public meeting of the Young Socialists held in Regina August 9.
"For a long time I've been a revolutionary who saw
the need to bring about socialism and tried to work within
organizations which I thought were promoting that end. But all of
those organizations had the limitation of either just representing
certain sectional interests of one group like, say, students, and
couldn't really escape just working for the aims of that particular
group — the Canadian Union of Students was such an organization — or
they recognized the need for socialism but couldn't make all the
bridges, all the links between the situation now and the socialist
revolution. CSM was this type of organization."
Of the other four, Howard Brown, John Caswell, Karen
Kopperud and Paul Kouri, two of them also ran in the Saskatoon municipal
elections. Brown ran for alderman and Kopperud for school board trustee.
Paul Kouri, a graduate student at University of Saskatchewan, has been
active in student politics there and wrote for the Prairie Fire, a
radical provincial newsweekly.
The CSM had been wracked with crises over direction from
the day of its formation. Differences had centered over such questions
as its orientation to the New Democratic Party and its left wing
"Waffle" caucus, the relationship of revolutionaries to mass movements,
and how a revolutionary organization is built.
Last winter several members of the Regina local of the
CSM split from the CSM to work exclusively in the NDP and Waffle. They
argued that (at least for the present period) nothing more than the
Waffle group is needed. Other members of the Regina CSM leaned in the
opposite direction of writing off the NDP and Waffle because of their
reformist program.
The leaders of the Saskatoon CSM who later joined the
Young Socialists argued against both positions. They said the NDP is a
labor party independent of the capitalist parties and contains the most
advanced and conscious sections of the Canadian working class. As such
it reflects within its ranks the growing radicalization in Canada. They
pointed to the emergence of the Waffle caucus as proof of the
correctness of this view. Socialists they stated, must work in the NDP,
and struggle to give the party a socialist program. But they also
pointed out the necessity to go beyond the NDP and its left caucus, to
build a revolutionary. organization that can lead the Canadian
revolution.
During the July 26 debate some CSMers, grouped around a
document called the "Brown Document" (because it was printed in brown
ink), projected that the CSM could evolve into a revolutionary
leadership organization if all the forces in it could stick together
around a "minimum basis of unity." The five disagreed, explaining that
such a vanguard organization as is needed to lead the Canadian workers
to a successful revolution couldn't spontaneously develop out of a
regional amorphous group with no program. They argued that a
transitional program that relates to the level of consciousness of
Canadian workers, students, etc. now and involves them in struggle for
socialism must be the basis for such an organization.
Secondly, they argued that such an organization must be
democratic centralist, not an amorphous organization based on
"consensus" agreements. Lastly, they argued that such an organization
and program exists in the Trotskyist movement.
On August 9 the CSM split again with 13 people left in
the organization grouped around the "minimum basis of unity" of the
Brown Document. This is what remains of what was once an organization of
some 200 supporters.
The CSM was one attempt by the "new left" to find a new
road to the socialist revolution, a short cut. In spite of a long
history of consensus politics in Saskatchewan where various tendencies
submerged their differences, the CSM could not survive. The new left,
with its skepticism about the revolutionary potential of the working
class, has had the props knocked out from under it. The general strike
in France in May 1968 showed most graphically the willingness of the
working class to overthrow capitalism. It also showed to thousands of
youth on this continent as elsewhere the need to build a leadership that
can lead that struggle of the workers to a successful socialist
revolution.
The five CSMers who joined Young Socialists/Ligue des
Jeunes Socialistes last month are just a sign of things to come. More
and more youth are coming to see the necessity of joining in the
building of the future leadership of the Canadian revolution. The YS/LJS
along with the League for Socialist Action/ Ligue Socialiste Ouvriere
represents this leadership inasmuch as it already exists in Canada. The
task is to build it into the leadership capable of creating a socialist
Canada in a socialist world.
The move of five leading Saskatchewan socialists who
have had a long experience in the new left to join the YS/ LJS is a sign
of things to come.
The program of activities the Saskatoon Young Socialists
have begun promises to attract far more youth in Saskatchewan to the
revolutionary movement. They are actively building the antiwar and
women's liberation movement there and participating in the New
Democratic Party. They have carried a YS forum in Regina and have
planned one for Saskatoon on why they joined. Tours of the province, the
prairies, and across Canada are also planned.
Young Socialist,
September 1970
On July 26 five leading members of the
Saskatchewan-based Committee for a Socialist Movement announced to a
provincial meeting of the CSM that they were leaving it to join the
Young Socialists/ Ligue des Jeunes Socialistes. This decision came after
months of debates within CSM, an organization that contained the many
points of view of its members by avoiding the adoption of any clear
program. It was an attempt by the "new left" to find a new road to the
socialist revolution.
The five, Howard Brown, John Caswell, Karen Kopperud,
Paul Kouri, and Richard Thompson are all leading Saskatchewan socialists
who have had a long experience in the new left. Their decision to join
the YS/ LJS is a significant sign of the times.
The following is the text of speeches given at a public
Young Socialists meeting in Regina, August 9, where three of the five
spoke along with Jacquie Henderson, executive secretary of the YS/ LJS.
In these speeches the three explain their reasons for joining the Young
Socialists.
Karen Kopperud
I'd
like to welcome you tonight to this meeting, the first of a series to be
held in Regina by the Young Socialists. The Young Socialists is an
organization of revolutionaries. That means that we feel that all the
problems people experience in the context of our present society — war,
poverty, pollution, the deep economic crisis of this province — flow
from a cause, the nature of this profit-oriented society. We see that
there are no real solutions to these problems until the entire society
is changed.
I think we should be very clear about the kind of change
that we are talking about. When we say that we are revolutionaries we
are not talking about a change in Society that would take place some
dark groovy night when a small group takes over the local palace and
runs up the red flag. We are talking about a change that will involve
the vast majority of Canadians consciously acting to change the entire
society and all the relationships in it, from the way people relate to
each other, to the way that the government operates to the way people
relate to their jobs.
We're out to change the whole system. We see that all
the problems of Saskatchewan are intimately tied to the problems
throughout the whole country, the continent, the world. And therefore if
you are serious about changing the system, about changing the world, it
is necessary to confront the system where you find it. To be effective
you have to build an organization capable of doing that. That is one of
the important reasons why a number of us decided to join the Young
Socialists. We felt that we could no longer continue to confine our
activities purely to the problems of Saskatchewan. The YS is the only
cross country movement which offered the opportunity for serious
socialists to coordinate their struggles across the country and around
the world.
The first speaker tonight is significant not just in
himself but because, in many ways, he represents the experiences many
young people have gone through — the things they've felt had to be done,
the ways they've tried to devise to change things.
Richard Thompson first became involved in political
activity quite spontaneously in 1965 during a sit-down of hundreds of
young people at the U.S. consulate in Toronto in solidarity with the
black struggle in the U.S. From that action a number of people including
Richard came to the conclusion that something more was necessary than
the one action.
At that point Richard came to Saskatchewan to
participate in "cleaning up our own backyard," as we were told do when
we demonstrated over "U.S. problems" like the oppression of blacks. He
came to Saskatchewan to organize among the Native Indians in the Neestow
Project that was run by the Student Union for Peace Action. After that
he came to the Saskatoon campus of the University of Saskatchewan and
became active in campus politics. Still searching for a way to change
society he, like many other radicals, joined the Company of Young
Canadians and became one of the board of directors. Later he resigned
from that. He has been active in the Young New Democrats and a regional
organizer of the Canadian Union of Students. He has been active in
politics at the University of Saskatchewan, having run several times for
the student council and being one of the editors of the student paper
the River Fiddler.
In the past year Richard has participated in building an
organization called the Committee for a Socialist Movement which was yet
another attempt to build some sort of organization that could lead in a
profound social change. Through his experiences in that organization he
has come to the conclusion that it is inadequate and recently joined the
Young Socialists. It is the reasons for that political process that
Richard is going to talk about now.
Richard Thompson
I
didn't prepare in great elaborate detail a speech on the process I went
through. What I want to raise is some of the general themes that I think
come out of it — themes about socialism and how to make the revolution.
I think there are three main directions radicals are
going in Canada today. One is reformism, the tendency that sees that
capitalism can be reformed, that it doesn't need to be overthrown. One
is ultra-leftism, those people who call for armed struggle now. The
other is Trotskyism.
I've never really been a reformist. I've been a liberal,
I guess I've been apolitical and I've been radical. But I've never
believed in the reformism put forward by the leadership of the New
Democratic Party. For a long time I've been a revolutionary who saw the
need to bring about socialism and tried to work within organizations
which I thought were promoting that end. But all of those organizations
had the limitation of either just representing, certain sectional
interests of one group like, say, students, and couldn't really escape
just working for the aims of that particular group — the Canadian Union
of Students was such an organization — or they recognized the need for
socialism but couldn't make all the bridges, all the links between the
situation now and the socialist revolution. The CSM was this type of
organization.
Ultra-leftism and reformism are both based in an
idealist world view. They don't recognize the existing reality in Canada
today and what the possibilities are right now for building the
socialist movement. The reformists wish that the problems of the world
could be solved by reforming capitalism. They don't want to have to work
for a fundamental change in society. So they conclude that capitalism
can be reformed. The ultra-lefts wish that the revolution could be made
today without a long process of participating in the struggles of the
working people and all oppressed people to take them forward. So they
say that this is the time for armed struggle for power: It is because of
this idealism, their failure to recognize the reality of the class
struggle today that I rejected both of them.
When we look at the class struggle in Canada today we
see most clearly that people's consciousness is not the same. A few
workers see the need for socialism. Others don't see that need. They
think their problems can be solved by trade unions or by the NDP, and so
on. It is an unevenly developing consciousness. And not only is it an
unevenly developing consciousness, but there are different sectional
interests which can conflict. The farmers fight for their interests, the
workers for theirs, the students for theirs, etc. What is necessary in
order to bring all these struggles together into one common fight that
can overthrow capitalism is some sort of organization that has an
understanding of why the struggles are being fought in the way they are,
which has some program that can bridge the gap between where the
struggle is now and where we're trying to get — to socialism. I saw the
need for an organization which could do this on a consistent basis.
That is why I joined the Young Socialists.
Karen Kopperud
The next speaker is Howard Brown. Howard is from
Saskatchewan, has spent all his life here. He was active in the NDY. He
is now active in the NDP and particularly in its left-wing Waffle
caucus. Howard, along with Richard and myself, was a candidate for the
CSM in the municipal elections that took place in Saskatoon last fall.
Howard is going to talk about something that was one of the most
controversial questions in the CSM — a question which brought about the
downfall of CSM. That question is the relationship of revolutionaries to
the NDP.
Howard Brown
The
Canadian new left, since its very inception has rejected the New
Democratic Party. In its earlier period the new left had a very
ambiguous and amorphous sort of ideology. It was characterized by an
anti-authoritarianism and anti-bureaucratism and centered around
concepts of community organizing and what was described as
"participatory democracy". It rejected both class analysis and
historical materialism as a mode of historical explanation. It rejected
the working class as any kind of a vehicle for revolution.
Today I think its even less possible to talk about a new
left ideology. The new left is factionalized in a desperate search for
theory and a strategy that can begin to explain the present dilemma and
provide it with some sort of strategy for the next period. A whole
plethora of tendencies, sects and factions have emerged. Anarchism,
spontaneism, terrorism, ultra-leftism, often mixed with some form of
Maoism, are all characteristics of the present new left. Basically the
new left is a product of the uneven development of consciousness which
Richard was referring to — the spontaneous radicalization of students at
a juncture in which the working class remains relatively passive.
When we say that the student movement emerged
spontaneously we don't mean to say that it sprang from the sky. What we
mean is that the student movement arises basically out of the
contradictions that exist within the capitalist university and the
contradictions of world imperialism. Particularly the Cuban revolutions
and the struggle of the Vietnamese people have given a tremendous
incentive to radical students. They have bared the hollowness of the
rhetoric and the ideology of advanced capitalism.
When we say that the new left emerged spontaneously, we
mean that the new left has existed by a painful process of trial and
error of a primitive character. It is clear that this spontaneity is not
enough. It is not enough to repeat over again all the experiences and
mistakes of earlier generations of revolutionaries without learning
anything.
The new left has generally come to the recognition of
its impotence in isolation and has thus come understand that it is the
working class that will make the revolution. What remains is for the new
left to recover the historical lessons of well over a century of working
class struggle. It is our contention that experience is best summed up
in its positive aspects by Trotskyism.
We support the NDP, despite its leadership. That may
seem contradictory but the contradiction is not ours. To the contrary,
that contradiction is rooted in the contradictory nature of the NDP. As
similar as the bureaucratically-determined policy of the NDP may be to
the Liberal and Conservative parties, the NDP is not a capitalist
party. We support the NDP because it is a labor party. This fact is
determined by its affiliation with the trade union movement, its support
by workers at the polls, and particularly by its general independence
from the capitalist class. Our strategy is to build an alternative
leadership to the bankrupt leadership of the Romanovs, the Blakeneys,
Douglas', Lewis', a leadership based in a socialist program.
Marx said somewhere in Capital, that theory only
begins when we penetrate below the appearance of things. The
ultra-lefts may recite all kind of rhetoric which may seem theoretical,
but their understanding of politics argues that of appearance. The NDP
for the ultra-lefts is no more than its reformist leadership. That's all
they see when they talk about the NDP. Elitists themselves, they
understand politics only in terms of the activity of elites. Whatever
their recognition of some rhetorical working class they're fond of
talking about but have very little contact with, the ultra-lefts fail
completely to understand the political activity of that class.
Inevitably spontaneous radicalization will be reflected
in the NDP. We can already see it in the development of the Waffle. For
revolutionaries the choice in this situation is quite clear — either
they can adopt a sectarian position, they can abandon the real movement
of the working people and make rhetorical pronouncements, or they can
build the NDP on the basis of an attempt to lead the radicalization in
confrontation and on going basis with the NDP bureaucracy. The latter
perspective is that of the Trotskyists. It is the perspective of
attempting to lead the working class, not abandoning it.
We regard the development of the Waffle caucus in the
NDP as a tremendously positive development. For the first time in
Saskatchewan, socialists are organized into a caucus which functions
openly and democratically within the party. Not only has the caucus open
a discussion around basic socialist ideas in the clubs — if it only did
that it would be a tremendous development. But it has posed itself, in
terms of the Don Mitchell campaign for the leadership of the
Saskatchewan NDP, as an alternative leadership. Whatever criticisms
might be brought against the Waffle in terms of its program, its
independent candidacy for the leadership has signified a tremendous step
forward in working class politics in this province. It has adopted a
strategy of grass roots organizing, a strategy of increased orientation
to extra parliamentary activity and has refused to engage in any sort of
unprincipled collaboration with the Blakeney leadership of the party. We
support the Waffle. We support the Saskatchewan Waffle strategy. And the
Saskatoon Young Socialists will make every effort in the next period to
build the Waffle caucus. We can only ask for your support.
by Howard Brown
Labor Challenge,
October 5 1970
It was not just one of the largest, but also without
question the most productive socialist youth conference the Prairies had
ever seen.
And when the September 18-20 Young Socialists conference
in Saskatoon drew to a close, major antiwar and women's liberation
projects had been launched, and a clear strategy worked out for the work
of socialists on Prairie campuses this year.
An audience of close to 200 packed an enthusiastic first
session to hear French revolutionary leader Alain Krivine speak on the
significance of the world-wide youth revolt. Over 100 students and young
workers from Edmonton, Lethbridge, Saskatoon, Regina, Brandon and
Winnipeg stayed to participate in the three days of debates and
workshops.
In its wide representation of student activists, its
ambitious agenda and wide-open discussion, the conference resembled
student gatherings previously organized in the west by the New
Democratic Youth or the Canadian Union of Students.
But in concentrating on clarifying differing views,
zeroing in on concrete proposals, and uniting to carry them out, the
conference set a new tone in Prairie student gatherings.
The conference registered the rapid growth of the Young
Socialists on the Prairies over the past year. From an isolated group in
Edmonton the YS has expanded to four established and active centers,
with other groups soon to be organized.
The session on women's liberation was a highpoint of the
discussions. It issued the call for a conference of all western women's
liberation groups and activists, to be held in Saskatoon in the early
winter.
Discussions on the Vietnam war led to the decision to
organize antiwar mobilizations in all major Prairie centers on October
31.
The first day's session included a discussion of the
defense of the "Regina 12," students arrested for their activities in
opposition to the Vietnam war.
Later the conference heard Manon Leger, 23-year-old
candidate of the Ligue Socialiste Ouvriere for mayor of Montreal,
describe the growing movement for an independent socialist Quebec.
The main strategical theme of the conference was
presented by Richard Thompson of the Saskatoon YS. He described the
strategy of the "red university," which projects how student actions can
transform the campus into a base for revolutionary social action.
Thompson, who before joining the YS was a prominent figure in the new
left circles and the now defunct Canadian Union of Students, explained
how the new left student leaderships had shown their limitations in the
struggles of the past two years.
[See Note]
The student movement has fluctuated between purely
reformist strategies and ultraleft actions which isolate revolutionary
students. The alternative, he said, is building mass student struggles
around a patiently and flexibly applied transitional program.
Howard Brown of the Saskatoon YS elaborated on the
crisis of the New Left: "Its basic dilemma was its failure to overcome
the spontaneity which had produced it." The failure of the new left to
commit itself to building a revolutionary Leninist party is its decisive
error. "Only such a party is capable of the tremendous task of
strategical co-ordination involved in a socialist revolution," Brown
said.
The discussion on "Red Power in Canada," led by Jeff
Choy-Hee of the Edmonton-based Native Youth Alliance for Liberation,
centered on the demands that the government uphold all treaty and
aboriginal rights granted the treat and people, and respect the right of
the native people to determine their own life.
The concluding report to the conference, by Jacquie
Henderson, executive secretary of the Young Socialists/Ligue des Jeunes
Socialistes, emphasized the magnitude of the task of socialist education
on the campuses, and the key role of the socialist press in carrying out
this task.
Reports from Young Socialist locals reflected the bright
future of revolutionary socialist youth in the west. All YS locals are
in a good position to intervene energetically on the campuses, to move
towards transforming them into the socialist strongholds projected by
the "red university" strategy.
Socialist History Project Note:
The views Richard Thompson presented in the talk
described here were also presented in The
Present State of the Student Movement, a paper he submitted to the
YS/LJS internal discussion bulletin at about the same time.
[ Top ] [
Documents Index ]