[The following article appeared in the January 11 issue of the Paris fortnightly Inprecor The translation is by Intercontinental Press.]
At the Sixth National Conference of the Socialist Youth (SU), which took place November 13-15, 1981, the tensions and contradictions that had existed in the organization for more than two years reached the breaking point.
On the first day of the conference, a split took place in the SU. It occurred when the majority of the leadership, in close collaboration with the leadership of the "parent organization," the Left Socialist Party (SV), decided to toss aside any observance of the bylaws and any respect for the organization's internal democracy, in order to expel a segment of the opposition.
When some of the delegates at the conference refused to recognize the legitimacy of this expulsion, the whole organization was declared dissolved, obviously following a decision by the leadership of the Left Socialist Party.
The aim of this bureaucratic operation is to rid themselves of the encumbrance of the opposition within the Socialist Youth. In particular, the Oslo section had exasperated the majority of the SU and SV ever since it became the beacon for oppositional criticism of the party's reformist line.
The SU-S V leadership did everything possible to avoid a real discussion of the political differences, reducing them to a question of "loyalty" to the party and its leaders. The opposition, however, had openly criticized the restriction of the SV's activities solely to the parliamentary sphere, its tailending policy toward the social democrats of the Labor Party, its sectarianism, nationalism, and lack of serious orientation toward the working class and workers struggles.
The entire leadership of the Socialist Youth had supported these criticisms in principle. But the opposition also wanted to translate these criticisms into action, through a more independent line in relation to the "parent organization" and by giving priority to work in the trade unions.
But this was rejected with the formalist argument that the SU, being a youth organization, had to therefore concentrate its activities on "the problems of young people," and leave trade-union work to the party.
When the conference was held, the SU-SV leadership tried to divide the opposition and isolate the Oslo section. But the delegates from all the large cities, like Bergen, Trondheim,
It is also possible that the AMG can develop as a center of regroupment for the whole Noras a center or regroupment for me waole INorwegian left. This could particularly be the case with regard to the opposition current within the Maoist party, the Communist Workers Party Marxist-Leninist (AKP-ML). The AKP-ML has greater influence in the working class than the pro-Moscow CP which, in Norway, is a small sect.
A number of Trotskyist activists had been members of the SU for eighteen months. Taking part in the opposition, they had cooperated closely with the opposition current that was the motor force within the Oslo section. The Norwegian revolutionary Marxists fully supported the criticisms against reformism and the positive turn in the direction of the working class. For that reason they have become members of the AMG to take part in the construction of this new revolutionary organization.
Up to now, left reformism and Maoism have been dominant in the Norwegian left. But new opportunities are arising.