Editor’s note:

In 1996, a debate took place which became known as the ‘Name change debate’ in what was then Militant Labour, soon to become the Socialist Party.

It was not merely a discussion about choosing a new name. During the Open Turn debate of 1991, the question was posed like this:

For Marxists, the crucial problem of strategy and tactics is this: How can a revolutionary minority win the support of the majority of the working class and other exploited layers, particularly given the hold of the traditional mass parties over large sections of workers? (‘For the Scottish Turn’, paragraph 30.)

The question was still how to win the majority of the working class to the ideas of Marxism – but the situation had changed.

The effects of the collapse of Stalinism in 1989 (the fall of the Berlin wall, the collapse of the Soviet Union) were still being felt. A wave of capitalist triumphalism flooded the world’s press with the cry that there was no alternative to the ‘free market’ system. It was now a vital task of socialists to defend and re-assert the validity of the basic tenets of socialism.

The Labour Party had been characterised by Lenin as a ‘bourgeois workers’ party, because it had a bourgeois leadership and a working class base. Historically, the working class saw the Labour Party as their party. It was from within the Labour Party that the Militant Tendency, the forerunner of the Socialist Party, had since 1964 attempted to challenge the Labour Party leadership’s adherence to capitalism, and present a clear socialist alternative to the working class.

By the mid 1980s the Militant was called the fifth largest party in Britain by the journalist Michael Crick. The ruling class launched a ferocious media campaign against the Militant and against the left wing of the Labour Party in general. Rather than exposing these attacks, and supporting the Militant-led Liverpool City Council’s 1983-87 campaign against the Thatcher government, the right-wing Labour leadership, aided by some rightward moving former left-wingers, vituperously attacked the Militant and eventually starting the expulsions of Militant supporters.

The Labour Party moved decisively to the right. The Labour Party membership fell, particularly amongst workers, and the democratic structures through which the working class had a voice and could place some pressure on the rightwing Labour leadership were neutered or destroyed. This led to the Open Turn debate, in which the Militant Tendency left the Labour Party and set up Militant Labour. Finally, in 1995, the Blair leadership symbolically ditched Labour’s socialist clause, which called for the common ownership of the means of production distribution and exchange.

The working class now not only lacked a leadership capable of fighting on its behalf against the range of attacks it was facing, it now lacked a party to fight in its interests.

In 1995, Peter Taaffe, the Socialist Party general secretary, anticipated the Name Change discussion in ‘Our Programme and Transitional Demands‘, a document circulated throughout the Committee for a Workers’ International. Peter briefly outlines an analysis of the world situation and the central tasks facing the revolutionary party.

In a short section, Peter raised the question “Labour or Socialist?” returning to examine the questions he raises several more times in the document:

Given the decay of the ‘traditional organisations’ of the proletariat, one of the key questions which now faces the Marxist movement is the demand for independent political workers’ action and organisations…

Even the term ‘Labour’ is increasingly discredited in most countries, because of the role of the corrupted trade union leadership. Nor is this restricted to Africa, Asia and Latin America.

In the USA the demand for a Labor Party may have to be amended by our comrades there. The term ‘Labor’ is now identified in the minds of many workers with the corrupted trade union leadership of the AFL/CIO.

It would perhaps be more appropriate to demand a Socialist Party in the conditions which obtain in the USA.

It is clear that the raising of such demands in good season will prepare the ground for the formation of independent political organisations of the proletariat, and consequently the raising of the authority of our organisation…

We also gained in the case of Greece where we anticipated the formation of the Socialist Party (PASOK), and in Spain where we also predicted the rebirth of the PSOE (Socialist Workers’ Party). This gave us a head start over our rivals in influencing the advanced sections of the working class.

In South Africa we supported the idea of a workers’ party. However, before the election we did not advance this as ‘slogan’. Now in the aftermath of the election, and with the increasing opposition to the bourgeois leaders of the ANC, particularly from the trade unions gathered under the banner of COSATU, it is necessary to raise more openly and energetically the idea of a workers’ party.”

But how, concretely, could this be done in the UK? Later on, Peter argues: “It is necessary both in terms of the name of an organisation and its programme to take into account the concrete national and social traditions of every country.”

In the course of the following discussion, which developed into the ‘Name Change debate’, various essential ingredients were identified. First was that the British section of the Committee for a Workers’ International, Militant Labour, should identify itself clearly with its socialist aims by changing its name to the Socialist Party. There was a need to defend the ideas of socialism and Hannah Sell wrote ‘Socialism in the 21st century‘ as part of this campaign. But also it was necessary to campaign for a new mass party for the working class, which of itself would not necessarily immediately have a commitment to a rounded out socialist programme, but in which the Socialist Party would be a current, arguing for Marxist ideas.

In the course of the debate it became clear that Militant Labour, to be renamed the Socialist Party, would need to carry out two vital tasks. First, to defend the genuine ideas of scientific socialism, founded by Marx and Engels and developed by Lenin and Trotsky, and attempt to win the most politically aware workers to the ideas of Marxism. But at the same time it was necessary to campaign amongst the mass of the working class for the re-establishment of what had been first achieved at the turn of the century – a mass party of the working class in which class-conscious workers are united around a basic programme to defend their living standards, in opposition to the demands of the capitalist class.

We have included in our selection of documents members’ bulletin no.16, entitled ‘A discussion on democratic centralism‘, printed in March 1996.

The ‘statement on the name‘, members’ bulletin no. 17, followed immediately in May 1996. Members bulletin 18, entitled ‘The name change debate’ followed in June. In September 1996, members bulletin 19, entitled ‘Name Debate III‘ was produced, and the final bulletin of this debate, members bulletin 20, entitled ‘The name debate (4)‘came out in November 1996. Each of these bulletins contained several documents representing the various points of view expressed during the debate.

In 1997, the Socialist Party was formed, the ‘Militant’ newspaper was renamed ‘The Socialist’, and the Socialist Party stood candidates in the in the general election of the same year. For the first time the Socialist Party did not advocate a vote for the Labour Party, while expressing understanding that many workers felt they had to do so at this stage. The Socialist Party warned that in power the Labour Party would prove to be an entirely bourgeois party, a pro-capitalist party which had abandoned its working class base, as turned out to be the case.

The Socialist Party began campaigning for a new mass party for the working class. The ‘Campaign for a new Workers Party’ was launched, and in 2006 the Socialist Party participated in the RMT (National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers) Shop Stewards Conference, which set up the National Shop Stewards Movement. The Name Change debate influenced the direction of other sections of the CWI, which were facing similar issues.

Abbreviations

CJA: Criminal Justice Act

EC – Executive Committee

NC – National Committee

ML – Militant Labour

SML – Scottish Militant Labour