do not hold back the working class by purely organisational means, ar even by personal credihsity The reality is that when the labourist speaks on the 'national interest", on 'democracy, and all too often on questions like race, he is cutting with the grain of the working class con•sciousness. When the revolutionary puts Forward his ideas he is cutting against the grain. Every word of the labourist finds an echo in the minds of miltions. Most words of the revolutionary meet • brick wall. It is a tenet of Leninism, something IS says it adheres to, that only the combination of so extraordinarily powerful uparge of the maases and a revolutionary party with deep roots in the working class, can shake off the mound of ideolog cal and political rubbish from the past and make a revolution possible. Revolutionaries completely deny that this task can be accomplished simply by propaganda.
Once this is understood theo it is choar that in the greatest of working class upsurpes, right up to the revolution itself, all the rubbish of the past WI WONDE LOWEL DO ENE WOEKI CLASS It in this fact, nor the few thousands factivists, which gives the heal power to the Labour Party, The working class does not go around saying it is great to be exploited' or 'capitalisin is marvellous But, unfortunately, they do believe in "the nation, that things can only get sowly better, 'avoid extremism", and the million and one other things that make up labourNOT SUPERFICIAL These concepts are not sometling superficial but something which pullour of workers, including millions who have never heen in the Labour Party, have absorbed and heen conditioned by since the first moments of their conscious existence. This power, this is qualitatively stronger ar the present than the organisational hold of the Labour Party over working class militants. This power is not destroyed Just because workers may follow CP members or revolutionaries in trade when struggles. WOHN MARSHALL
In the years following the 1967 war,