THE GLEAM OF SOCIALISM : BRITAIN’S COMMUNIST PARTY 1920-2020
By Robert Griffiths
Praxis Pres. 264 pages. £17. ISBN 978-1-899155-27-9
Reviewed by Jim Burns
I think the first thing I need to say is that this is not a
narrative history of the British Communist Party. It touches on many
aspects of its activities over the years, but in the form of articles and
essays, book reviews, obituaries, and other material previously published in
a variety of left wing books, magazines and newspapers, among them the
Morning Star and
Communist Review. Griffiths is General Secretary of the Communist
Party of Britain (CPB), the Morning
Star is its daily paper. Having said that, I want to make it clear that
I’m not intending any criticism of his book by suggesting that it doesn’t
offer a complete history of the
Communist Party. It has its own values in terms of providing in book form a
number of individual items that might otherwise have been overlooked among
the acres of print that we encounter each day.
There are several long pieces that do give an outline of what the Party did
following its founding in 1920. This is particularly true of “100 years of
struggle for the working class and humanity”, a revised version of a
pamphlet originally published in 2000. In it Griffiths, referring to the
delegates who assembled at the Unity Convention in London in 1920, says,
they “were united by deep revolutionary feelings, a profound hatred of
capitalism and a deep disgust at the repeated betrayals of workers’
interests by corrupt reformist
leaders”. One of the subjects
that came up for debate, and continued to do so, was how far Party members
should involve themselves with
the Labour Party. Griffiths points out that many delegates “supported the
views of Lenin expressed at the Communist International (founded in 1919)
and in his letter of greetings to the Unity Convention where he advocated
‘participation in Parliament and affiliation to the Labour Party on
condition of free and independent
Communist activity’ “.
Other delegates thought that “parliamentary politics were a diversion and
that the CPGB (Communist Party of Great Britain) should concentrate on
industrial struggle”. They may have had a point. Griffiths comments that
when a Labour government won the 1924 General Election it was “In office but
not in power”.
I haven’t the space to account for all that the Party, and particularly
individual Party members, were involved with throughout the 1920s and 1930s.
Strikes by miners, railwaymen, and others, the
1926 General Strike, the Depression, the Spanish Civil War, and much
more. It wasn’t all major activity, and in some ways it’s the minor works
that might have boosted the Party’s reputation more than ideological
matters. People could see communists in action as they fought to keep
Mosley’s fascists off the streets, helped evicted families, opposed rent
rises, were prepared to go to prison for their beliefs and in some cases
left home and went to Spain to fight Franco and his German and Italian
supporters.
The 1939 Nazi-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact
of 1939 caused consternation in communist circles, and resulted in
many members leaving the Party. Griffiths holds to what might be called the
official line and asserts that Stalin knew that war was coming and had tried
to get Britain and France to agree to a combined front against Hitler. When
that failed he negotiated with Germany as a means of buying time for a
build-uip of his military and other resources. Not every historian would
agree with Griffiths.
And in Britain communists were not popular when, in obedience to the line
laid down by the Comintern, the Party opposed the war. The instruction was
that, this “was an imperialist and unjust war for which the bourgeoisie of
all the belligerent states should bear equal responsibility. In no country
can the working class or the Communist Party support the war”. Harry
Pollitt, the General Secretary of the British party, refused to go along
with the Comintern policy and was replaced by someone who would support it.
The line changed in 1941 when Germany invaded Russia
and it once again became acceptable
to be a communist and openly proclaim it. After all, the Party now told
workers that it was unpatriotic to go on strike and they should work harder
to help the war effort. Membership rose during the war years as “Uncle Joe”
and the Russian army were
celebrated in films, books, and on the radio.
It didn’t last. The end of hostilities in 1945 soon saw the onset of the
Cold War as communist intentions in Eastern Europe became obvious. Poland,
Hungary, Czechoslovakia and other countries came under Soviet control,
reports of communist spies stealing atomic secrets were in the news, the
Berlin airlift added to the
tension, and in 1950 the Korean War started, pitching communist North Korea
supported by China against a United Nations force which included British
soldiers. Feelings ran high. I
recall an old communist I knew in my home town telling me how he was pulled
off his soapbox and pursued by a gang of angry sailors from a ship in the
local docks who didn’t like what he said about what was happening in Korea.
Griffiths works hard to demonstrate that communists remained active in the
1950s and beyond, but there’s no denying that they were less influential
than they had been. Gone were the days when Willie Gallacher and Phil
Piratin could be elected to Parliament and communists became local
councillors. Membership slumped in the 1950s fo[lowing the Kruschev
revelations about Stalin’s crimes and the Russian invasion of Hungary and
the bitter fighting that took place in and around Budapest. I was in the
British Army in Germany in 1956 and one night on guard duty I was fiddling
around with a high-powered short-wave radio in the guardroom and picked up a
faint cry for help from somewhere in Hungary. It was obvious that the West
wasn’t prepared to risk a Third World War by aiding the Hungarians in any
way. Around the same time I did wonder how we could justify our conspiring
with the French and Israelis to invade Egypt and seize control of the Suez
Canal.
Interspersed with the lengthy pieces about Party policies and practices are
a number of short items about individual communists who, though probably not
well-known in a wider context, devoted much of their time and energy to
local matters. One or two might be remembered because they did attract some
attention from a largely hostile press. Derek Robinson – “Red Robbo” as the
right-wing daily papers labelled him – is one example. He was a union
activist at the British Leyland plant at Longbridge and was sacked,
according to Griffiths, for “putting forward an alternative to a misnamed
‘Rescue Plan’ that would sink 25,000 jobs at the British Leyland factory”. I
have some memories of the reports in the press about Robinson’s
activities, but I can’t
comment too closely on the facts surrounding his dismissal, though there’s
little doubt that he was a marked man as far as the employers were
concerned. Griffiths refers to him leading strikers out “Not once but
reputedly 523 times”. As a
well-known communist he was also marked for attention by the
police and the security services.
Griffiths pays tribute to some of the women who were active in communist
circles. Thora Silverthorne was a nurse with the International Brigades in
Spain and was later involved in union organising. Dora Cox edited the
womens’ page of the National Minority Movement’s publication
The Worker in the 1930s. MI5
described her as “one of the more important members of the CPGB” and “worth
a warrant”. She worked in a woollen mill in Burnley, organising and
spreading the word about communism, and was involved with Wal Hannington and
the National Unemployed Workers’ Movement. She continued her radical
involvements almost to the time of her death in 2000. Annie Powell was
associated with “Red Rhondda” . She trained as a teacher, and when she began
her career in Trealaw was shocked by what she saw: “The poverty of the
people and of the children was something that hit me really hard”.
She campaigned as a communist and won a seat as a councillor on
Rhondda Borough Council in the late-1940s. I’m giving only a brief account
of her activities and Griffiths supplies many more details. But it’s worth
noting that, “After a spell as Deputy Mayor, her Labour colleagues elevated
Annie to the mayorship in May 1979, shortly after the election of
Margaret Thatcher as Tory prime
minister”.
The CPGB split in the early
1980s and some of Griffiths’ writings look at aspects of why the various
factions feuded and what the result was.
I’ll let him tell the story : “A faction of self-styled
‘revolutionary democrats’ or ‘Gramscians’
- later more widely referred to as ‘Eurocommunists’ – believed that
the Party and formulations in its programme exhibited tendencies to ‘class
reductionism’ and ‘economism’ : too much time and resources were allegedly
devoted to the economic aspects of the class struggle.
As a consequence, the CPGB was neglecting the social, cultural and
ideological fronts, neglecting vital issues and social forces that could not
simply be analysed in terms of ‘class’ “.
Griffiths obviously wasn’t in agreement with them, and his review of Geoff
Andrews’ Endgames and New Times : The
Final Years of British Communism 1964-1991, which he notes tends to
favour the “Gramscians” (after Antonio Gramsci, the Italian Marxist)
is bitingly dismissive. Some of this might be of interest only to
Party members and left-wing academic historians. Suffice to say that the
“Gramscians” largely
disappeared from the scene, along with their journal,
Marxism Today, the Party slightly
re-named itself as the Communist Party of Britain (CPB) and,
I’m glad to say, retained control of the
Morning Star. As a non-communist,
but a regular reader of the paper, I welcome its focus on trade union
matters, its book reviews, and its coverage of art, music and theatre.
There is much more in The Gleam of
Socialism than I’ve been able to deal with. Articles about
Arthur Horner, the one-time president of the South Wales Miners
Federation (the “Fed” as it was
known in its hey-day), and Dai
Dan Evans, evoke another age that might seem strange to many younger
readers. Reading about such people made me recall a couple of comments made
years ago by people I encountered in my working life. One was by a man who
didn’t care for the principles of communism but said he did admire
individual communists for their dedication to trying to improve working
conditions and the lives of people in their communities. The other was
during a conversation with an older colleague who told me he had belonged to
the Young Communist League and had heard Harry Pollitt speak at Manchester’s
Free Trade Hall. He’d later drifted away from communism, but said that, on a
local level, he’d known some “bloody
good people” in the Party.
The Gleam of Socialism
is informative from a committed point of view, has a useful bibliography,
some photographs, and both subject and name indexes.