The name of Cliff Slaughter will be familiar to many readers of this Blog as a leading light of the Socialist Labour League / Workers Revolutionary Party from the 1950s until the break with Healy in 1985.
We are very pleased to have been offered this interview, conducted by Victor Osprey, a writer and socialist from Australia.
We reproduce the interview in its entirety below with some links to papers and other items in our collections.
Italicised notes are by Victor.
Cliff Slaughter has quite a history on the left. He has been a member of the Communist Party of Great Britain and the Socialist Labour League (later renamed the Workers Revolutionary Party, WRP) sitting on the latter’s Central Committee. He was regarded as its leading intellectual, producing numerous articles, essays, and books in that role.
He was also a member in a series of successor organisations after Gerry Healy, its longtime leader, was expelled from the Workers Revolutionary Party in 1985.
He has continued to write books, all the while engaging in the process of a substantial rethinking of his ideas and politics – drawing particularly from the works of Marxist philosopher István Mészáros in that effort.
Cliff Slaughter, it is a pleasure to speak with you, one socialist to another. I have recently been reading your book ‘Bonfire of the Certainties’ here in Australia and find it a valuable and interesting work of socialist literature. What was the initial inspiration for the book?
Cliff Slaughter: Why the book? Trying to settle accounts with my Workers Revolutionary Party past.
You mention the Russian writer and novelist Vasily Grossman in your book. I have noticed other ex-members of the Workers Revolutionary Party making positive remarks about Grossman’s writings. How do you feel about what Grossman has to say as a writer, novelist and human being who experienced Stalinism firsthand?
CS: Other comrades followed me in reading him. He is unbelievably honest and brave in every respect.
When did you first come across the works of István Mészáros, and what impact did they have on you?
CS: I first read his The Power of Ideology. Geoff Pilling attended one of his lectures and approached him. He was very positive about my Marxism, Ideology and Literature, and got in touch with me.
And the man himself – what kind of relationship did you have with him? Did you and Mészáros collaborate on any projects together?
CS: We were thence very close – He sent me all his books and we met several times. I visited him at his home several times. His Beyond Capital I found very powerful. He worked harder than anyone I have ever known. We were extremely close. His thesis of the structural crisis was influential on me, as you know. We did not publish any collaborative work.
I asked Slaughter about his early life, and he was able to clear up an inaccuracy listed on his Wikipedia page, which said he was a Bevin Boy – young British boys and men conscripted to work in the coal mines, named after the Labour Party Member of Parliament, Ernest Bevan, who served as the wartime Minister of Labour during World War II.
When and where were you born?
CS: Born in Doncaster, 1928.
What was it like being a Bevin Boy in the middle of World War II?
CF: I was not a Bevin Boy. That category ended in 1945. I had the option of pit work when called up and did my two years 1947-49, before taking up my scholarship at Cambridge.
What events politicised you and drew you towards the left?
CS: My father joined the CP in 1943.
Why did you join the Communist Party and not the Labour Party?
CS: Ditto. I knew the Labour Party was a reformist trap.
In 1956, twin crises rocked the Communist Party of Great Britain. First came Khrushchev’s secret speech which denounced Stalin, regarded as a heroic figure by Communist Party militants. Then came the revolution in Hungary that same year, which saw the formation of workers’ councils – and a Soviet invasion to put it down.
Ordered by the very same Khrushchev who had so recently criticised Stalin for his crimes against socialism.
When did you leave the Communist Party? What convinced you that the Communist Party could not be reformed?
CS: I left the CP after Khrushchev’s speech. I looked at the real history of Stalinism, especially the work of Brian Pearce and knew it was irreparable.
Meanwhile, outside the Communist Party, the British Trotskyists in their different organisations continued with their intellectual and practical work. Formerly united in the Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) in the 1940s, which managed to gain a certain foothold of influence, by 1949 the organisation had stagnated, and in July decided to dissolve itself. They reconstituted themselves as The Club, joining the Labour Party and operating inside it as Trotskyists. Gerry Healy, who had joined the Trotskyist movement in the 1930s, emerged as a major figure inside the RCP, and became the leading figure of The Club.
Had you known about The Club before you left the Communist Party, or had interactions with Trotskyists of any sort?
CS: I knew no Trotskyists.
How influential was the Club when you joined it? How many members did it have?
CS: Healy’s organisation had little influence, but made gains from the CP in 1956-58. It had about 40-50 members before that.
Gerry Healy was born in Galway, Ireland, on the 3 December 1913, the son of a farmer. The details of his early life remain obscure, but according to Healy himself, ‘he joined the Young Communist League in Britain in 1928, although this may be just another of the myths he cultivated about his own history, along with claims that his father was murdered by the Black and Tans and that he acted as a Comintern courier into Nazi Germany. By 1936, Healy… was a member of the Communist Party’s Westminster branch. He was then still a party loyalist and a fervent anti-Trotskyist to the extent that he became a regular member of a group of Stalinists who went to Hyde Park to argue with and, on occasions, physically assault Trotskyist speakers.
One regular victim of the attentions of Healy and his fellow Stalinists was Jock Haston, who was then a member of the Militant Group, a Trotskyist organisation led by Denzil Harber which worked in the Labour Party. In the course of their repeated arguments, Haston recalls, he succeeded in winning Healy over to Trotskyism.’
Healy’s authoritarianism would become evident early on, with his manoeuvring to expel Club member Tony Cliff and his supporters for their ideas once he was in a position to do so. When Ted Grant, another member of The Club who disagreed with the ideas Cliff was floating protested against the violation of their democratic rights and bureaucratic expulsion, he was expelled as well. Healy and his supporters had even gone so far as to move a motion that anyone who voted against the expulsion of Cliff’s supporters would be automatically expelled.
Cliff would go on to form the Socialist Review Group, which eventually became the International Socialists and then the Socialist Workers Party. It was associated with the promotion of rank-and-file groups in the 1970s and its formation of the broad, effective anti-fascist front the Anti-Nazi League.
Grant would eventually form Militant, which engaged in long-term entryism in the Labour Party. By the early 1980s, Militant had grown in such size and influence as to become a major force inside the Labour Party. Several Militant MPs were elected to office. This terrified the Labour right and the soft left, directly leading to a successful witch-hunt against Militant directed by then Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock.
How did Gerry Healy first enter your life?
CS: I was contacted by Healy’s members in Leeds.
Once you got to know Healy, did he tell you anything about his working life in the late 1920s and early to middle 1930s, such as when and where he was a merchant seaman? Did he give you any details about his membership in the Young Communist League or the Communist Party before he was expelled?
CS: Healy told me nothing about his earlier life.
As I understand it, you became friends with Peter Fryer. Had you known him when he was in the Communist Party, or only after you joined The Club?
CS: I knew Fryer from my days in the Young Communist League.
Peter Fryer was a committed English Marxist, a writer and journalist. He would write a classic account of the Hungarian Revolution, The Hungarian Tragedy, based on his first-hand witness, having been sent to cover the events by the Communist Party newspaper, the Daily Worker. He also wrote a pioneering history of Black Britions in 1984, Staying Power: The History of Black People in Britain, drawing praise from the likes of CLR James and Paul Gilroy. Delighted at the explusion of Healy, Fryer would write a weekly column for the post-Healy WRP newspaper, the Workers Press for a number of years.
Fryer became an editor of the journal of the Socialist Labour League, The Newsletter, established in 1958. What kind of circulation did The Newsletter have under the editorship of Fryer?
CS: Peter founded The Newsletter. It had, I think, about 2000 readers.
When Fryer left the Socialist Labour League, how did you feel about that? When did you reconnect with him?
CS: I felt very bad about Fryer’s expulsion, but did nothing. I ‘reconnected’ only when we expelled Healy.
Were there gradations of Healy’s bullying between the membership and the leadership, or did everyone who got in his way get treated harshly and with contempt?
CS: Healy brooked no opposition.
What relationship, if any, did the Socialist Labour League, later renamed the Workers Revolutionary Party, have with the other Trotskyist groups? I read in Clare Cowen’s (former WRP member) memoir that there was once a debate between Healy and Tony Cliff. Was there much productive engagement with other organisations, or was it mostly just denunciations?
CS: We had only hostile relations with groups calling themselves Trotskyists.
In 1953, there had been a major split in the ‘World Party of Socialist Revolution’, the Fourth International, the organisation which united Trotskyists – or revolutionary socialists/Marxists as they often referred to themselves – globally. The Club, which had been the official British section of the Fourth International (FI) from 1950 to 1953, withdrew from the organisation in 1953 alongside several others. These included the American Socialist Workers Party (SWP) whose predominant figure was James P. Cannon, and the Organisation Communiste Internationaliste (OCI) in France, led by Pierre Lambert.
This split would eventually be healed in 1963, with the American SWP returning to the fold of the Fourth International – but the SLL and OCI, Healy and Lambert, would choose not to be part of it.
When The Club had split, they had helped to set up a new international organisation, the International Committee of the Fourth International (ICFI) which continued to exist after the reunification of the FI proper.
Stronger links were established with the OCI in the post-1953 period, and Slaughter became friends and comrades with a number of OCI members.
With the 1953 split in the Fourth International, the SLL established a relationship with Pierre Lambert’s Organisation Communiste Internationaliste (OCI) in France. How close was the relationship, and were there any tensions between Healy and Lambert? Did you make friends and enjoy warm comradeship with particular members of the OCI, including after they left Lambert’s organisation?
CS: We were for a time close to the OCI. I was especially close to and in agreement with Raoul, who rightly denounced his ally on the OCI Central Committee for saying, ‘I have decided for the party’, with Raoul saying ‘That’s Stalinism!’
In his book Bonfire of the Certainties, Cliff Slaughter has this to say about Raoul and his ideas: “As the collapse of the Soviet Union and Stalinism approached in the 1980s, a French comrade, Raoul, was able to speak of ‘the end of the age of the commissar’. Ideas of what constituted leadership and the qualities of a ‘leader’ were common in almost all the groups and parties trying to be communist. Two correctives would have been salutary. Raoul, a highly respected Trotskyist, wrote: ‘The role of a leader is to be listened to and respected, not feared’. The novelist Balzac, an amazingly wise social commentator, wrote, ‘To lead a party is it not necessary to be in concordance with its ideas?’
Outside of the SLL/WRP itself, what was the biggest section of the International Committee of the Fourth International? What notable contributions did ICFI sections make to the left, labour movement, and the struggle against oppression in other countries?
CS: The IC was virtually a fiction, consisting of only a few very small and influential groups (like Australia).
Australian socialist John Percy, in his book about the Socialist Workers Party in Australia of which he was a member, has this to say about the local ICFI franchise, called the Socialist Labour League:
‘They were very much a sect… very hostile and sectarian towards anyone they disagreed with (which was everyone on the left). They organised dances for working-class youth in the suburbs, and recruited on a very minimal basis, with a very high turnover. They refused any joint political campaigns with other left groups, and for a while they grew.
They built profitable bookshops in Newcastle, Perth and Parramatta. They bought their own offset press, and wanted to put out a daily paper, modelled on their mentor in Britain.
In July 1976, we organised a speaking tour for US SWP Afro-American leader Willie Mae Reid, who was the SWP’s vice-presidential candidate… the SLL did its utmost to disrupt her meetings. In Sydney they got in and tried to shout her down with a small demonstration.
For a while the SLL had some support in sections of the Arab community. It was able to make use of the film The Palestinian, made by British SLL member Vanessa Redgrave. But after a while the SLL and the United Palestinian Workers had fallen out strongly over the cynical use of the film showings.
Kate Blakeney, a member of the British SLL’s National Committee, whom Healy had sought to assault sexually, fled to Sydney with her family in 1978. We recruited her, and she was elected to our NC.’
As secretary of the International Committee, what did the average day in that role look like? Did the ICFI have any functioning democratic decision making bodies independent from the dictates of the WRP, the Central Committee, and the passing whims of Healy himself?
CS: The IC had no political or organisational independence.
Did you know or have much contact with Tim Wohlforth of the Workers League in the USA?
CS: I knew Wohlforth very well. He is now an advocate of capitalism, which he asserts ‘has never been stronger.’
Tim Wohlforth was a leader of the ICFI’s American section, the Workers League. He had been a member of Max Shachtman’s Independent Socialist League (ISL), breaking with Shachtman as the ISL moved rightwards. Shachtman pushed the ISL to merge with the moribund Socialist Party of America, while a minority of ISL members around Wohlforth chose to join the Socialist Workers Party instead. Inside the SWP, Wohlforth and another former ISL member, James Robertson, formed the Revolutionary Tendency. This tendency criticised the SWP on various grounds, such as its attitude to the new government in Cuba after the Cuban Revolution. Roberston left the SWP in 1962, going on to form the notorious Spartacist League; Wohlforth continued on the fight inside the SWP, coming to defend the views of the ICFI, and was expelled in 1964 as a result.
Supporters of the ICFI in the US formed the Workers League, with Tim Wohlforth as its central leader. After Healy accused Wohlforth’s partner, Nancy Fields, of being a CIA agent in 1974, a vote to dismiss Wohlforth as National Secretary and expel Fields was carried – with Wohlforth and Fields voting for. After a brief sojourn back into the SWP, then slowly falling under the iron grip of its then (and still) leader Jack Barnes, Wohlforth left the far-left for good. He wrote a memoir about his experiences, The Prophet’s Children: Travels on the American Left, and died in 2019.
But the WRP’s international contacts would expand well beyond the ICFI, as the party sought direct relationships with various Middle Eastern regimes and movements. These efforts bore fruit, as the WRP formed a particularly close bond with the Libyan government led by Muammar Gaddafi. They also received money from Saddam Hussein, and had good relations with the Palestinian Liberation Organisation – including its leader, Yasser Arafat.
Alex Mitchell, an Australian journalist who became the editor of the Workers Revolutionary Party daily newspaper, the News Line, visited Libya on numerous occasions. This included a visit drawing up an agreement for the WRP to publish tens of thousands of copies in English of Gaddafi’s The Green Book, and to print the official Libyan newspaper Al-Zahf Al-Akhdar (The Green March). The revenue stream was healthy enough to help assist with the substantial costs of producing a daily newspaper.
Eventually, Healy would travel to Libya with Mitchell, where they were granted a personal meeting with the Libyan dictator.
During the long-ranging discussion, at one point Healy was talking about the French Revolution, and suggested there had been a restoration of a kind when Napoleon Bonaparte proclaimed himself Emperor.
In his memoir Come the Revolution, Mitchell recounts that at this point, ‘Gaddafi became animated and delivered a rhapsodic tribute to the French conqueror. His eyes flashed as he rattled off the names of battles in which Napoleon had defeated the British, Dutch, Germans and Austrians, although he was less forthcoming on the encounter with the Russians.’
What about the relationship the WRP had to regimes in the Middle East – notably Gaddafi’s Libya, but also Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and organisations like the Palestine Liberation Organisation and its leader, Yasser Arafat? Did you feel that the WRP’s connections to and promotion of such regimes were opportunist at the time?
CS: All Healy’s international and national contacts were opportunist. To my shame, I was almost silent. The relationship with Saddam was for money, also Gaddafi. I went to a Tripoli conference on Gaddafi’s ‘Green Book’ and took a plane back after a day and a half, unable to stomach any more.
Did the collaboration with Labour lefts in the 1980s like Ted Knight (who would be elected Labour leader of Lambeth Borough Council and had once associated with the Socialist Labour League) and the printing on the party presses of the weekly Labour left newspaper Labour Herald (edited by Ted Knight and Ken Livingstone) pay off for the WRP itself, or was the party simply happy to see the Labour left do well on its own terms?
CS: Healy’s relation with Knight was kept secret from the rest of us. On reflection, I think it gained us nothing.
Ted Knight, who died in March, was politically active for almost 75 years. In a tribute written to Knight by John McDonnell and Paul Feldman, they recount his history on the left:
‘Expelled from the party in 1954 for associating with Trotskyists then active in Labour and organising a meeting on the abolition of the monarchy, Ted Knight was finally readmitted in 1970. He became a councillor in Norwood in 1974 and in 1978 leader of Lambeth Council.
In 1979, he stood as Labour candidate for Hornsey at the general election.
Ted Knight founded the weekly Labour Herald in 1981, along with his co-editors, Ken Livingstone, then leader of the Greater London Council, and Matthew Warburton, deputy leader of Lambeth Council.
They played a key role in changing the Labour Party’s position to one of recognising the right of Palestinians to self-determination.
When the Thatcher cabinet imposed a cap on the local rate that councils could levy, in a bid to reduce local government power, Ted Knight led a campaign against the policy. In 1985, Lambeth councillors refused to make a capped rate for the next financial year because it would have resulted in large-scale cuts to services.’
Jeremy Corbyn, who served as Knight’s election agent when he was the candidate in Hornsey, had this to say:
‘His leadership of Lambeth Council was legendary. He stood up to the Thatcher government and improved public services to meet the needs of working people. The establishment made him pay a huge price by trying to bankrupt him. But he was not deterred by this and spent his life campaigning for socialism. He had a deep knowledge of the history of the movement, going back to his childhood in the North-East. We will all miss him.’
How many trade unionists went through the ranks of the WRP? I have read that during the miners’ strike in 1984-85, quite a few local leaders had had a stint in the Young Socialists (youth wing of the WRP) at some point.
CS: Trade unionists were negligible, I think.
In September 1974, prominent trade unionist and WRP member Alan Thornett resigned from the WRP in despair at what he regarded at its ultra-left line. When Healy offered Thornett the chance to put his disagreements before a special meeting of the Central Committee (and, if necessary, a special conference of the WRP) if he would withdraw his resignation, Thornett did so, and also formed an internal faction in the WRP. After Thornett spoke before a meeting of the WRP CC, Healy closed the meeting and delegated you to give the reply a week later.
How did you handle Thornett’s critique of the sectarianism of the WRP and what he and others considered its break with the Transitional Programme? What do you think about your response now and how the internal WRP dissenters were treated, that is, being heavily criticised and shortly thereafter expelled?
CS: Alan Thornett appeared at the CC with his friend Tony Richardson. At this meeting, Healy proposed we changed from SLL to WRP, because we were in a revolutionary situation! When he called for discussion, there was silence, until he said: ‘Slaughter, say something!’ I replied, ‘It’s not a revolutionary situation.’ Healy exploded and said something like ‘You’re giving aid and comfort to Thornett and co.’
Were Thornett’s criticisms correct, and was this a missed chance to democratise the WRP?
CS: I think Alan Thornett is no Marxist.
Alan Thornett remains a Marxist activist. After he and several hundred others were expelled from the WRP, they formed the Workers’ Socialist League together. The WSL underwent a re-evaluation of the WRP’s politics but remained Trotskyist in their orientation, lasting about a decade. Thornett has written extensively about eco-socialism, and released his book Facing the Apocalypse – Arguments for Ecosocialism in 2019. Of his other books, Militant Years covers the trade union and political struggles in the Morris Motors (later British Leyland) car assembly plant in Cowley where he worked. Thornett is today a member of Socialist Resistance, the British section of the Fourth International.
In September 1975, The College of Marxist Education was opened by the Workers Revolutionary Party in Derbyshire. For the next decade, it was the site of countless lectures by Healy on dialectical materialism. His lectured were based on Lenin’s Philosophical Notebooks, his Materialism and Empiriocriticism, and later Marx’s Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 was added.
David North recounts the experience of sitting through one of these lectures:
‘Healy’s method of lecturing consisted of extended introductory remarks, which generally dealt with problems which had arisen in the work of the WRP. Up to this point, the audience followed Healy with lively interest. Then, he invariably turned to the blackboard and began drawing diagrams which supposedly represented stages in the cognitive process as manifested in the categories of the Hegelian dialectic. It was not long before the entire audience was utterly bewildered, having lost track of where “semblance” ended and “appearance” began, or at what stage “finite” became “infinite” and “something” turned into its “other.” Matters were not made any easier by the fact that Healy never drew the same diagram twice and it could never be predicted with certainty whether “actuality” would show up before “existence” or the other way around. Indeed, attempts by students to memorise Healy’s dialectic through all its adventures inevitably failed; because it never followed the same path on successive days.’
What were the biggest stumbles of the WRP at the level of Marxist theory and analysis? For example, I’m thinking of the pseudo-philosophical works and lectures by Healy, and the way that was promoted and justified internally in the organisation.
CS: Healy’s lectures on philosophy were delivered first to the circle around Vanessa Redgrave, who were very impressed by his Hegelian words. He actually knew nothing about philosophy, and even less about science. ‘Justified’? Never discussed.
Behind the scenes, those who had been victims of not only Healy’s perennial bullying, but his sexual abuse and predation were plotting to bring him down. They went public with their accusations via the form of a letter read out and distributed at a meeting of the Central Committee in 1985. These events and the lead up to them are covered in great detail in Clare Cowen’s memoir, My Search for Revolution.
When the accusations of sexual harassment and rape against Healy was first aired, how did you respond?
CS: I immediately proposed his expulsion.
How should socialists and Marxists approach questions of women’s oppression, feminism, and how to organise – especially in the light of different left-wing organisations failing to effectively deal with sexual harassment or abuse?
CS: See my book Women and the Social Revolution.
Have you read the memoirs of either Alex Mitchell (Come the Revolution) or Clare Cowen (My Search for Revolution)? What did you think about them and how they portray life in the Workers Revolutionary Party?
CS: Mitchell is better, though inaccurate in some details. Clare’s book lacks theory and politics. I had good relations with both. Neither gives a useful picture.
In your opinion, what were the greatest strengths and weaknesses of the WRP?
CS: We lost opportunities, e.g, 4000 Young Socialists at Alexandra Palace none of whom remain. Weakness: above all, Healy.
The WRP specialised in huge set piece events, like rallies at Alexandra Palace, which drew in large audiences – the Young Socialists was the WRP youth wing.
In the wake of the expulsion of Healy, as people struggled to deal with the enormity of what had happened, a whole series of new organisations sprang out of the wreckage. Healy and those who continued to support him set up their own group, which rejected his expulsion. He died in 1989, believing that Mikhail Gorbachev was carrying out the long called for, by Trotskyists, political revolution to overthrow the rule of the bureaucracy and restore power to the soviets.
Leadership of the ICFI passed to the American section under David North, who promptly expelled the British section, now known as the Workers Revolutionary Party (Workers Press) after the name of their publication. Cliff Slaughter remained in its ranks.
One of the most remarkable efforts the WRP (WP) engaged in during the 1990s was throwing itself wholeheartedly behind Workers’ Aid for Bosnia.
Workers’ Aid for Bosnia was a solidarity organisation formed by British socialists and trade unionists as Yugoslavia began to crack up. It organised truckloads of humanitarian aid, taking them to the multi-ethnic mining region around the Bosnian city of Tuzla. It was one of the most integrated regions in Yugoslavia, with the highest rate of interethnic marriages. A place which had the largest number of people who described themselves as ‘Yugoslavs’ without reference to their ethnicity on the census. A location permeated with a class outlook going back to a miners uprising in 1920; one which led the miners to donate one day’s pay a month to British miners during the 1984-85 strike.
In 1993 Tuzla was surrounded on three sides by the Serbian army, and Workers’ Aid for Bosnia resolved to do whatever it could to help the people there.
How to understand and relate to what was happening during the breakup of Yugoslavia understandably led to a number of different positions taken on the British left. Workers’ Aid for Bosnia was the practical product of a particular set of views on the conflict.
Can you speak about the experience of founding Workers’ Aid for Bosnia in the early 1990s and the kind of work the organisation carried out?
CS: Workers’ Aid was our best venture, organised by my friend Bob Myers. He acted on a suggestion by a Serbian comrade, and organised, with great self-sacrifice, convoys to Tuzla.
Did you ever travel to Bosnia yourself?
CS: I did not make the journey to Bosnia.
How did the rest of the left in Britain regard Workers’Aid for Bosnia – positively or negatively?
CS: The rest of the left ignored Workers’ Aid.
What internal tensions existed inside Workers’ Aid for Bosnia between the socialist organisations that were a part of it? While united in a common project, there must have been differences over what to emphasise, what actions to carry out, and how to win the broadest possible support.
CS: Internal differences in Workers’ Aid. I don’t know of any.
After Healy was expelled, what happened to the organisation that came out of it which you adhered to, the Workers Revolutionary Party (Workers Press) and how did the Movement for Socialism emerge? What rethinking were you and the comrades in the Movement for Socialism engaging in when it came to the Trotskyist tradition and what a viable future socialist movement might look like?
CS: The WRP continued, though by then I was beginning to question ‘vanguardism’, and eventually I successfully proposed we simply call ourselves Movement for Socialism. Most comrades were by then disillusioned and anxious to live.
What kind of things are ex-WRP members doing these days, and what organisations or causes are they involved in? Did any join the Labour Party when Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader?
CS: Some ex-WRPers joined Corbyn’s party.
Several ex-WRPers now collaborate with and have written for Angry Workers’ World, a group based in west London supporting and encouraging workers’ self-organisation in the low-paid and migrant workforce.
How do you regard the state of the existing labour movement in Britain today?
CS: It hardly exists.
Thank you so much for taking the time to respond to my questions.
The forthcoming issue of the socialist journal Critique will feature a piece by Cliff Slaughter on Marx’s materialism.
 Bob Pitt, The Rise and Fall of Gerry Healy, Chapter 1, Marxists.org, https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/healy/pitt/Chap1.html  Ted Grant, The History of British Trotskyism, (England: Wellred Publications, 2002), 191.  John Percy, Against the Stream: The Socialist Workers Party 1972-92, (Carlton: Interventions, 2017), 123-125; Allen Myers, editor.  Alex Mitchell, Come the Revolution, (Sydney: NewSouth, 2011), 331.  Ibid., 333-334.  Paul Feldman and John McDonnell, A giant of our movement by Paul Feldman and John McDonnell, John McDonnell MP, https://www.john-mcdonnell.net/news/2020/03/30/a-giant-of-our-movement/  Ibid.  David North, Gerry Healy and His Place in the History of the Fourth International, (Detroit: Labor Publications, Inc), 84.  Bob Pitt, The Rise and Fall of Gerry Healy, Chapter Twelve, Marxists.org, https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/healy/pitt/Chap12.html  Some experiences of how not to organise and a more useful one, Angry Workers’ World, https://angryworkersworld.wordpress.com/2020/04/01/some-experiences-of-how-not-to-organise-and-a-more-useful-one/  Gabriel Levy, Workers solidarity in wartime: Bosnia 1993, Ukraine 2015, People and Nature, https://peopleandnature.wordpress.com/2015/03/30/workers-solidarity-in-wartime-bosnia-1993-ukraine-2015/