Continued from front page Another period of Footism without Foot cannot restore Labour's fortunes. tion where such a candidate of the centre could be supported for leader to stop the right is where there is no candidate of the left. Unfortunately Benn's Bristol defeat means that the plausible candidate of the left is unable to stand.
The lesson of the election campaign is that only the left can rebuild the party. who voted for Labour's policies can be organised to win a majority only if Labour is seen to lead the fight to defend the labour movement and all of those who are the target of the Tories' attacks. Right labourism cannot don't intend to vacate the non-socialist middie ground. Extra-parliamentary action and socialist policies are the only means to defend the working class and the only credible alternative to Thatcherism.
For this reason it is vital that there is a canThe only condiThe minority succeed. The Alliance I WAS very interested in John Ross's article (SA 3 June) on the the Tory Party, as provea Dy lls decaning percentage vote in success ve ceneral ciccuons.
I sincerely hope that he is right. But couldn't the same thing be said about the Labour Party on the same basis?
I don't have the figures for all the years John Ross quotes, but I do know that the Labour Party percentage or te vote ren rom 48.8 in 1951, , to 46.4 in 1955 to 43.8 in 1959, and 36.9 in 1979 (I take the figures from the Sunday Times).
Isn't there something wrong in socialists basing their hopes on elecOTA SAISNCSA FRED HALL, London N16. Thatcher - historical decline However I question declining too? WHILE Paul Lawson's analysis of the situation in the Middle East is reasonably correct (SA 27 May), his conclusion to say the least is questionable.
He states: 'For socialists there could be no question of who to support in the event of war. syrla Is a capilallsl state, ultimately allied wit menarsol 'But nonetheless it would in a war represent the forces of Arab nationalism, against an imperialist aggressor Socialists should stand without question for the defeat of Israel and a Syrian victory - however unlikely such an outcome.' Firstly, socialists shoulo never stano or anything 'without quesLOH If war does break out, copcclally wal the socialist response should not be to support the lesser of two evils, or as Paul Lawson would have it, the least imperialist state, in this case Syria.
If neither side is in the right the war must be wholly opposed. Obviously an alternative would. Lucu lave lo ut proposed, which would defuse the tensions ana provide a long term solution.
Isreal is a reality, and only genocide of the type that Israel is practising against Palestinians could change that reality.
ucnocac oi ally lacc is not the solution to the Middle East's problems Obviously a multi-racial Palestine, with Jews and Palestinians living equally, should be the ultimate aim. and the means of securing that aim lies Wilisaci The peace movement, which was created when mass opposition to Israel's war in Lebanon was organised, shows that there is a progressive movement within Israe itself an effective socialist movement could be built in Israel, the chances of an Arab-Jewish reconciliation would increase as a socialist Israel, by its very nature, would respond to most Palestinian demands.
Definitely an uphill
struggle and perhaps somewnat laealsuc, Du certainly better than cocac r calaous war in which Israel may eventually use her nuclear capacity.
Edinburgh.
----- pull-quotes -----
SoCiAlist ACTION
wow- INFLATIONS 0OWN 1%