London
Dear Farrell,
This is a brief reply to your letter of June 27th.
(1) We are all agreed on the necessity to provide a positive answer to the "unity" question, and we shall certainly allow no opportunity to slip by us in this respect.
(2) Our leadership is very conscious of the heavy responsibilities which would fall upon this section in the event of there being agreement on the JPC proposal. You are aware of the difficulties in France, and the problem of Comrade Peng, which leaves in the main the Swiss and German comrades. The heaviest burden would fall on our section, and whilst of course we know you would be right behind, so to speak, nevertheless we are separated by distance and decisions have sometimes to be taken quickly. We will have not only the problems of Pablo's intrigue but also the difficulties among the orthodox Trotskyists. For this reason, since we want to gain the maximum from the JPC proposals and in the interests of our movement's requirements internationally, it is extremely important that our section is as clarified politically as we can make it. Our strength as a leadership depends upon the political strength of the ranks. Here it is perhaps necessary to acquaint you with some of our problems.
(3) A big majority of our members have been recruited since the split in 1953. They are in the main first-class people who are very interested in the history of our movement. We have not neglected this and recently we have stepped up the educational aspect of this work. It is not our experience that the history of the Pablo question appears sterile to newcomers. Provided it is presented properly, it can be a great source of concrete educational value. For us the Pablo experiences are to a large extent an internal problem in the educational sense. It was in this respect that a critical article was written by Comrade Sinclair [Hunter] on Pablo's latest document. A copy was transmitted to Pablo by a Ceylonese member who borrowed it for study. Pablo of course starts screaming, but there is nothing we can do about that. Unity, as you yourself have stressed, means taking the movements as they are. Without being in the least factional, it will have to be acknowledged that these differences exist. Personally, I think that this is not a bad thing since it indicates that we are not going to tolerate any "monkey tricks". At the same time we will be ready to seize any opportunities that may arise to press the JPC proposals along. We are writing to them presently along these lines so that they can see we are behind you on this.
(4) We feel that the differences between the policy expressed in the Pabloite press and in their resolutions is, of course, the "two faces," as it were, of this eclectic tendency. We must be extremely careful here and educate our comrades to understand this, even though the objective situation is favourable. We will have an awful lot of unnecessary trouble if we don't do this. There are, as you know, no short cuts in this connection, and we are taking steps to provide our comrades with an up-to-date summary of all the documents. For you, Pabloism is not a problem, but for us it still remains one, although in a really small way.
(5) In Britain the Grant group is a rump sectarian hangover from the old Revolutionary Communist Party. It campaigns against us with Pablo's assistance, but it makes no progress. Our comrades are constantly reminded of the factional side of Pabloism as a result of all this, and it is another reason why we are proceeding cautiously. The Grant group by itself is not a problem—but in the hands of Pablo as part of his organisational faction, it could do a lot of damage in our organisation. We wouldn't of course tolerate this. In any case right now they are against "entry" and in favour of "open work" with Pablo's full support. A small "entrist" group split away from them at their Whitsun conference. A fusion is not really practicable unless we want to keep going over the old dispute of the forties. Grant essentially lives in the past. To this very day he says the RCP was correct.
Our section is being changed almost beyond recognition. We have recruited and are in the process of recruiting a layer of intellectuals and mass workers, such as we have never been able to touch in the past. We are a a result greatly strengthening our hands inside the Labour Party and the trade unions.
We are having a meeting of the IC in the very near future and I feel certain we can then issue an immediate statement supporting the JPC proposals.
Comradely,
Burns [Healy]
Secretary
PS—Enclosed is a draft letter which will come up for ratification in two days.