Labour Party (UK): Difference between revisions

From ProleWiki, the proletarian encyclopedia
(add introduction)
Tag: Visual edit
mNo edit summary
Tag: Visual edit
Line 1: Line 1:
The Labour Party is a bourgeois political party<ref>{{Citation|author=Vladimir Lenin|title=V. I. Lenin: Collected Works-Volume 31: April-December 1920|title-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/jul/x03.htm|chapter=Speech On Affiliation To The British Labour Party|quote=First of all, I should like to mention a slight inaccuracy on the part of Comrade McLaine, which cannot be agreed to. He called the Labour Party the political organisation of the trade union movement, and later repeated the statement when he said that the Labour Party is ‘the political expression of the workers organised in trades unions’. I have met the same view several times in the paper of the British Socialist Party. It is erroneous, and is partly the cause of the opposition, fully justified in some measure, coming from the British revolutionary workers. Indeed, the concepts ‘political department of the trades unions’ or ‘political expression’ of the trade union movement, are erroneous. Of course, most of the Labour Party’s members are working men. However, whether or not a party is really a political party of the workers does not depend solely upon a membership of workers but also upon the men that lead it, and the content of its actions and its political tactics. Only that determines whether we really have before us a political party of the proletariat. Regarded from this, the only correct point of view, the Labour Party is a thoroughly bourgeois party, because, although made up of workers, it is led by reactionaries, and the worst kind of reactionaries at that, who act quite in the spirit of the bourgeoisie. It is an organisation of the bourgeoisie, which exists to systematically dupe the workers with the aid of the British Noses and Scheidemanns.|lg=https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=7C5A2899D40CE21335BB23D5BD939F02|mia=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/cw/volume31.htm|chapter-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/jul/x03.htm}}</ref> in the United Kingdom. First established in 1900, it grew out of the labour aristocracy of the 18th century.<ref>{{Citation|author=Karl Marx, Frederick Engels|year=1993|title=Collected Works, Vol. 46: Marx and Engels: 1880-1883|chapter=Engels to Marx. 11 August|page=121|quote=I couldn't remain on the staff of a paper which lends itself to writing up these German Trade Unions, comparable only to those very worst English ones which allow themselves to be led by men sold to, or at least paid by the middle class.|isbn=9780717805464|lg=https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=4895955E97BC739D970BC228FE88DC4E}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|author=Karl Marx, Frederick Engels|year=2002|title=Collected Works, Vol. 49: Engels: 1890-1892|chapter=Engels to Friedrich Adolph Sorge. 14 September|page=238|quote=The old Unions with the textile workers at their head, together with the entire reactionary party that exists among the workers, had mustered all their forces in order to overturn the eight hours resolution of 1890. [...] There is still much confusion, but there's no stopping things now and the bourgeois papers fully recognise the defeat of the bourgeois labour party [the Independent Labour Party].|publisher=International Publishers|isbn=9780717805495|lg=https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=62E59B459F42E549E84B5A0E611EF124}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|author=Vladimir Lenin|year=1916|title=Imperialism and the Split in Socialism|title-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/oct/x01.htm|quote=Formerly a “bourgeois labour party”, to use Engels’s remarkably profound expression, could arise only in one country, because it alone enjoyed a monopoly, but, on the other hand, it could exist for a long time. Now a “bourgeois labour party” is inevitable and typical in all imperialist countries|mia=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/oct/x01.htm}}</ref> It supported the imperialist [[First World War]], betrayed both the 1926 general strike<ref>{{Citation|author=Joseph Stalin|year=1926|title=The British Strike and the Events in Poland|title-url=https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1926/06/08bp.htm|quote=the general staff of the labour movement—the T.U.C. General Council and its “political committee,” the Labour Party—proved to be internally demoralised and corrupted. As we know, the heads of this general staff proved to be either downright traitors to the miners and the British working class in general (Thomas, Henderson, MacDonald and Co.), or spineless fellow-travellers of these traitors who feared a struggle and still more a victory of the working class (Purcell, Hicks and others).}}</ref><ref>{{News citation|newspaper=BBC|title=Lessons from Labour's first economic crisis|date=2009-06-04|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8079962.stm|quote=They [the trade unions] had a difficult relationship with Ramsay MacDonald [then Labour leader] who had disapproved of that strike.}}</ref> and the 1984 miners' strike,<ref>{{News citation|author=Harpal Brar|newspaper=Proletarian|title=History: The 1984/85 miners’ strike|date=2009-02-01|url=https://thecommunists.org/2009/02/01/news/history-the-198485-miners-strike/|quote=Just as during the strike, so now, 25 years later, bourgeois journalists, despicable Labour party bigwigs, contemptible members of the labour aristocracy – all of whom weighed in on the side of the ruling class to defeat the miners, supporting every government, police and judicial outrage against the strikers – instead of blaming the latter’s enemies, continue to blame the miners for the rundown of the industry.}}</ref> and has launched major imperialist wars; most principally, the [[Iraq War]], under the leadership of the war criminal [[Tony Blair]]. Whilst it can be credited with the nationalisation of major industries following the [[Second World War]], including the central bank, coal, steel, railways, gas, and electricity,<ref>{{Citation|author=Chris Rhodes, Daniel Harari, Edward Potton, Federico Mor, Jennifer Brown, Lorna Booth, Louise Butcher, Matthew Keep|year=2018|title=Public ownership of industries and services|title-url=https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8325/|chapter=A brief history of public ownership in the UK|section=Post-War nationalisations|page=6|pdf=https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8325/CBP-8325.pdf|city=London|publisher=House of Commons Library}}</ref> it should be noted that nationalisation is not necessarily the characteristic of a socialist government.
The Labour Party is a bourgeois political party<ref>{{Citation|author=Vladimir Lenin|title=V. I. Lenin: Collected Works-Volume 31: April-December 1920|title-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/jul/x03.htm|chapter=Speech On Affiliation To The British Labour Party|quote=Of course, most of the Labour Party’s members are working men. However, whether or not a party is really a political party of the workers does not depend solely upon a membership of workers but also upon the men that lead it, and the content of its actions and its political tactics. Only that determines whether we really have before us a political party of the proletariat. Regarded from this, the only correct point of view, the Labour Party is a thoroughly bourgeois party, because, although made up of workers, it is led by reactionaries, and the worst kind of reactionaries at that, who act quite in the spirit of the bourgeoisie. It is an organisation of the bourgeoisie, which exists to systematically dupe the workers with the aid of the British Noses and Scheidemanns.|lg=https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=7C5A2899D40CE21335BB23D5BD939F02|mia=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/cw/volume31.htm|chapter-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1920/jul/x03.htm}}</ref> in the United Kingdom. First established in 1900, it grew out of the [[labor aristocracy]] of the 18th century.<ref>{{Citation|author=Karl Marx, Frederick Engels|year=1993|title=Collected Works, Vol. 46: Marx and Engels: 1880-1883|chapter=Engels to Marx. 11 August|page=121|quote=I couldn't remain on the staff of a paper which lends itself to writing up these German Trade Unions, comparable only to those very worst English ones which allow themselves to be led by men sold to, or at least paid by the middle class.|isbn=9780717805464|lg=https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=4895955E97BC739D970BC228FE88DC4E}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|author=Karl Marx, Frederick Engels|year=2002|title=Collected Works, Vol. 49: Engels: 1890-1892|chapter=Engels to Friedrich Adolph Sorge. 14 September|page=238|quote=The old Unions with the textile workers at their head, together with the entire reactionary party that exists among the workers, had mustered all their forces in order to overturn the eight hours resolution of 1890. [...] There is still much confusion, but there's no stopping things now and the bourgeois papers fully recognise the defeat of the bourgeois labour party [the Independent Labour Party].|publisher=International Publishers|isbn=9780717805495|lg=https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=62E59B459F42E549E84B5A0E611EF124}}</ref><ref>{{Citation|author=Vladimir Lenin|year=1916|title=Imperialism and the Split in Socialism|title-url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/oct/x01.htm|quote=Formerly a “bourgeois labour party”, to use Engels’s remarkably profound expression, could arise only in one country, because it alone enjoyed a monopoly, but, on the other hand, it could exist for a long time. Now a “bourgeois labour party” is inevitable and typical in all imperialist countries|mia=https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/oct/x01.htm}}</ref> It supported the imperialist [[First World War]], betrayed both the 1926 general strike<ref>{{Citation|author=Joseph Stalin|year=1926|title=The British Strike and the Events in Poland|title-url=https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1926/06/08bp.htm|quote=the general staff of the labour movement—the T.U.C. General Council and its “political committee,” the Labour Party—proved to be internally demoralised and corrupted. As we know, the heads of this general staff proved to be either downright traitors to the miners and the British working class in general (Thomas, Henderson, MacDonald and Co.), or spineless fellow-travellers of these traitors who feared a struggle and still more a victory of the working class (Purcell, Hicks and others).}}</ref><ref>{{News citation|newspaper=BBC|title=Lessons from Labour's first economic crisis|date=2009-06-04|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8079962.stm|quote=They [the trade unions] had a difficult relationship with Ramsay MacDonald [then Labour leader] who had disapproved of that strike.}}</ref> and the 1984 miners' strike,<ref>{{News citation|author=Harpal Brar|newspaper=Proletarian|title=History: The 1984/85 miners’ strike|date=2009-02-01|url=https://thecommunists.org/2009/02/01/news/history-the-198485-miners-strike/|quote=Just as during the strike, so now, 25 years later, bourgeois journalists, despicable Labour party bigwigs, contemptible members of the labour aristocracy – all of whom weighed in on the side of the ruling class to defeat the miners, supporting every government, police and judicial outrage against the strikers – instead of blaming the latter’s enemies, continue to blame the miners for the rundown of the industry.}}</ref> and has launched major imperialist wars; most principally, the [[Iraq War]], under the leadership of the war criminal [[Tony Blair]]. While it can be credited with the nationalization of major industries following the [[Second World War]], including the central bank, coal, steel, railways, gas, and electricity,<ref>{{Citation|author=Chris Rhodes, Daniel Harari, Edward Potton, Federico Mor, Jennifer Brown, Lorna Booth, Louise Butcher, Matthew Keep|year=2018|title=Public ownership of industries and services|title-url=https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8325/|chapter=A brief history of public ownership in the UK|section=Post-War nationalisations|page=6|pdf=https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8325/CBP-8325.pdf|city=London|publisher=House of Commons Library}}</ref> it should be noted that nationalization is not necessarily the characteristic of a socialist government.

Revision as of 18:46, 6 May 2022

The Labour Party is a bourgeois political party[1] in the United Kingdom. First established in 1900, it grew out of the labor aristocracy of the 18th century.[2][3][4] It supported the imperialist First World War, betrayed both the 1926 general strike[5][6] and the 1984 miners' strike,[7] and has launched major imperialist wars; most principally, the Iraq War, under the leadership of the war criminal Tony Blair. While it can be credited with the nationalization of major industries following the Second World War, including the central bank, coal, steel, railways, gas, and electricity,[8] it should be noted that nationalization is not necessarily the characteristic of a socialist government.

  1. “Of course, most of the Labour Party’s members are working men. However, whether or not a party is really a political party of the workers does not depend solely upon a membership of workers but also upon the men that lead it, and the content of its actions and its political tactics. Only that determines whether we really have before us a political party of the proletariat. Regarded from this, the only correct point of view, the Labour Party is a thoroughly bourgeois party, because, although made up of workers, it is led by reactionaries, and the worst kind of reactionaries at that, who act quite in the spirit of the bourgeoisie. It is an organisation of the bourgeoisie, which exists to systematically dupe the workers with the aid of the British Noses and Scheidemanns.”

    Vladimir Lenin. V. I. Lenin: Collected Works-Volume 31: April-December 1920: 'Speech On Affiliation To The British Labour Party'. [LG] [MIA]
  2. “I couldn't remain on the staff of a paper which lends itself to writing up these German Trade Unions, comparable only to those very worst English ones which allow themselves to be led by men sold to, or at least paid by the middle class.”

    Karl Marx, Frederick Engels (1993). Collected Works, Vol. 46: Marx and Engels: 1880-1883: 'Engels to Marx. 11 August' (p. 121). ISBN 9780717805464 [LG]
  3. “The old Unions with the textile workers at their head, together with the entire reactionary party that exists among the workers, had mustered all their forces in order to overturn the eight hours resolution of 1890. [...] There is still much confusion, but there's no stopping things now and the bourgeois papers fully recognise the defeat of the bourgeois labour party [the Independent Labour Party].”

    Karl Marx, Frederick Engels (2002). Collected Works, Vol. 49: Engels: 1890-1892: 'Engels to Friedrich Adolph Sorge. 14 September' (p. 238). International Publishers. ISBN 9780717805495 [LG]
  4. “Formerly a “bourgeois labour party”, to use Engels’s remarkably profound expression, could arise only in one country, because it alone enjoyed a monopoly, but, on the other hand, it could exist for a long time. Now a “bourgeois labour party” is inevitable and typical in all imperialist countries”

    Vladimir Lenin (1916). Imperialism and the Split in Socialism. [MIA]
  5. “the general staff of the labour movement—the T.U.C. General Council and its “political committee,” the Labour Party—proved to be internally demoralised and corrupted. As we know, the heads of this general staff proved to be either downright traitors to the miners and the British working class in general (Thomas, Henderson, MacDonald and Co.), or spineless fellow-travellers of these traitors who feared a struggle and still more a victory of the working class (Purcell, Hicks and others).”

    Joseph Stalin (1926). The British Strike and the Events in Poland.
  6. “They [the trade unions] had a difficult relationship with Ramsay MacDonald [then Labour leader] who had disapproved of that strike.”

    "Lessons from Labour's first economic crisis" (2009-06-04). BBC.
  7. “Just as during the strike, so now, 25 years later, bourgeois journalists, despicable Labour party bigwigs, contemptible members of the labour aristocracy – all of whom weighed in on the side of the ruling class to defeat the miners, supporting every government, police and judicial outrage against the strikers – instead of blaming the latter’s enemies, continue to blame the miners for the rundown of the industry.”

    Harpal Brar (2009-02-01). "History: The 1984/85 miners’ strike" Proletarian.
  8. Chris Rhodes, Daniel Harari, Edward Potton, Federico Mor, Jennifer Brown, Lorna Booth, Louise Butcher, Matthew Keep (2018). Public ownership of industries and services: 'A brief history of public ownership in the UK; Post-War nationalisations' (p. 6). [PDF] London: House of Commons Library.