Still more serious is the fact that in a report and in a discussion on the international situation, there was no mention whatever of the development of guerrilla warfare in Latin America! Such an omission needs no comment and says more than the entire report of the session published in 1'Unita. Nor is there any validity to the speaker's vulgar rejoinder ("for these strategists it is always others who must act"). It is a matter, in fact, not of ignoring the tasks confronting us today in Italy, but of realizing that right now it is possible to deal more direct and effective blows against imperialism in other sectors of the world and that in Latin America guerrilla warfare is one of the essential means to that end.
The second feature to be noted is that the group in control of the PCI will attempt to increase its activities on all levels in the campaign for Vietnam in the immediate coming period. (This, moreover, occurred during and after the CC session, following the imperialist intervention in the demilitarized zone). This came about not only for obvious objective reasons but also to avoid the danger that the actions of others would fill the vacuun. (Some speakers at the Central Committee session did not fail to note that the "extremists" had also gained ground due to gaps in the party's activity).
_ Finally, perhaps an even more revealing note struck by this Central Committee, and certainly a new one, was the sharp attack delivered against so-called alien groups -- our movement among them -and the fact that in some remarks this designation was extended to the PSIUP {Italian Socialist Party of Proletarian Unity] or a part of it.
The reporter himself gave the signal and numerous speakers took up the theme, some in a more political form, others in the language of bureaucratic bigotry. The epithets "provocateurs, "
"defeatists," “venomous enemies of the Party," etc., were felicitously intertwined, demonstrating the methods with which people of basically Stalinist schooling -- a schooling unaffected by the surface veneer of "renovation" -~ propose to conduct a political polemic in the workers movement.
Pietro Ingrao [the leader of the official left wing] also added his voice to the chorus. He is quick to play the role of “hard cop" against the "extremists"; but he takes a much broader view when it comes to the Social Democrats or various figures -- including professional anti-Communists -- whom he seeks to engage in dialogue in the most diverse places.
We have noted elsewhere that for at least some of those at the session, "firmness" in dealing with "extremists" means hoodlum attacks.
The fact remains, however, that such sharp attacks, voiced by so many, is an indication of deep concern -- some "extremist" criticisms are finding a more and more responsive echo (some of the speakers said as much) and constitute a still greater danger to the opportunist bureaucrats since criticisms advanced by important sections of the international Communist movement can bolster then.
All the Central Committee's efforts to clarify the party's leadership will not, however, eliminate these difficulties nor the real, inherent contradictions, to which we referred at the outset.
In the first place, the principal slogans chosen will certainly not help to lend concreteness to the short-term perspectives and still less generate the spirit and enthusiasm necessary for the longer range prospects. The familiar theme of new relationships between the majority and the opposition, which has always seemed vague to the party membership, is not much clarified nor made any more concrete by virtue of the fact that it is now incorporated in a demand for a government defined only as a peace gov-— ernment (made up of whom? with what program?). The precedent claimed is a formula put forward more than fifteen years ago, which moreover was not followed up.
As for what ought to be the central objective today, that is, the inmediate withdrawal of NATO from Italy under conditions and circumstances such as to plunge that organization into a crisis, despite veiled statements by some of the speakers which revealed pressures operating in this direction, they preferred to hold on to the tired formula of nonrenewal in 1969, thus depriving the -647-
issue of any immediacy. We will not discuss the reaffirmation of a strategy which still seeks an alliance with bourgeois groupings against American imperialism, which was voiced in some speeches in particular, including a speech by Ingrao.
These proposals, which, we repeat, are in essence by no means new, threaten to prove even more sterile than in the past, since the international situation can be expected to remain critical and may even worsen. This may produce an impetus to radicalization despite the perspectives and plans of the leading group in the PCI.
Moreover, as we already pointed out, an intensification of the mobilizations has undoubtedly come about through official party decision, and for the first time even the trade unions have moved in a serious way. If this movement continues and new reports from Vietnam provoke new waves of indignation against the imperialist aggressors, it will be difficult to organize demonstrations under moderate slogans, and they will probably tend to become more militant and vociferous.
The hard attitude which they decided to take in dealing with "extremist" groups cannot easily be put into practice. First of all, the influence of these groups is considerable among the students, and no effective mobilization for Vietnam is possible without their participation and without them making their influence felt.
Even in demonstrations of a broader character, up until now vanguard groups and elements have had an incontestable weight and it will not be easy for any bureaucratic leadership to radically alter this situation, even with the most heavyhanded intervention.
There can be no question then of overcoming the phenomenon which is at the root of the lamentations and denunciations of the Central Committee of the Italian Communist party, that is, the growing alienation of ever broader sectors of the youth from the party's policy and methods. The resumption of a bigoted attitude toward the left, in conjunction with generous concessions to the Social Democrats, will inevitably increase this alienation, and still more so if the goon squads continue their activities.
The line which prevailed on international questions, then, points to a collision sooner or later with the Cubans. Many ultras probably even wish for it. But if it occurs, the difficulties they are trying to overcome by means of the guidelines they have indicated will increase considerably. The influence of a Fidel
Castro or a Guevara is not eliminated by refusal to publish their writings or by
calling the youth who look up to them
provocateurs.
BRITISH YCL DEBATE VIETNAM WAR ISSUE
By Fiona
London
The current upsurge of radicalism among British youth was reflected in the twenty-sixth annual conference of the Young Communist League at Skegness held May 27-29.
More than 750 youth were present, of whom 350 were delegates.
From the opening of the conference the opposition to the platform was fairly wide, if unorganized. Most of the pro- Chinese tendencies have been expelled or have left. In the last year a number of branches have been dissolved. The motion to accept the National Committee's standing orders for the running of the conference passed by only 110 votes to 90.
The most important debate centered around Vietnam, on the draft resolution of the outgoing National Committee, entitled: "The Political Situation and Unity." Officials were obviously sensitive to criticisms raised during the past year of the YCL's policy of immersing itself in peace formations whose central demands are for "negotiations" in Vietnam, as opposed to the demand for the unconditional withdrawal of American troops.
Barney Davis, national secretary, in opening the debate argued that the YCL did not wish to go further than the National Liberation Front. We should not, he said, force the NLF to fight for military victory, when in fact the NLF itself wants negotiations.
He called for a broad “unity of the left" on Vietnam, in essence a "popular front." According to him this would have been possible, but the Conservatives had been unwilling to come into it.
He chose not to mention the YCL's support for the positions of the Pope and U Thant, positions that have been rejected by the North Vietnamese.
Other delegates, not so sophisticated as the YCL leaders in giving a radical cover to right-wing positions, spelled out what this would mean in concrete terms.
"Yes," a delegate from Leeds stated, "we must support the YCL attitude to the Youth for Peace in Vietnam. We are for the victory of the Vietnamese, but
Campbell
this means forcing the United States to
the negotiating table -- and our main slo-
gan must be: Stop the bombing!" We want a
position that will give us the widest pos-
sible support, he said.
The opposition has argued for sol-
idarity with the Vietnamese. You cannot,
they have told the YCL leaders, accept
positions that cut across and negate the
right of the Vietnamese to self-determina-
tion.
The sharpest criticisms of the
leadership came from a Northold delegate.
Standing at the mike, holding up Che
Guevara's recent statement on Vietnam, he
asked how it was possible for the YCL
leaders to reconcile their policy to those
of "one of the greatest revolutionary
leaders, who says we must open up two or
three Vietnams and that this will be the
best way to help the Vietnamese."
The Northolt delegate criticized
the USSR and China. "The Soviet Union,"
he said, "is not giving enough aid to
Vietnam -- we must call for the unity of
the socialist countries to aid the Viet-
namese. We must follow the lead of Cuba,
North Korea and North Vietnam."
Amidst booing and heckling, he ac-
cused the YCL leadership of having a crawl-
ing, sniveling attitude to the question of
Vietnan.
Obviously stung by these remarks,
Barney Davis in his summary stated that
the Soviet Union is giving the Vietnamese
the aid they are asking for. In this he
reechoed the comments of a fraternal del-
egate from the Soviet Union.
The Soviet delegate had taken up
the question of Soviet aid to Vietnam in
his speech. He had also made an issue of
Trotskyism, saying that "the Trotskyites
have to be purged from our midst." There
were also fraternal delegates from most
of the Eastern European countries, but
none from China or Cuba.
Barney Davis, referring to Che
Guevara, said, "We are humanitarians and
we do not want another two or three Viet-
nams; we don't want to see more children
napalmed -- we don't want any more Viet-
nams. We must prevent a Third World War."
It should be pointed out that this is a
malicious distortion of the Cuban atti-
tude.
It was a well organized conference -- and well controlled by the leadership. An extremely adroit chairman ignored speakers who were critical, and at times he would not be so adroit in shouting recalcitrant delegates down. The microphone from which the delegates spoke was situated on the platform and could only be reached by sending the appropriate committee, well in advance, a note asking for permission to speak.
Points of order and comments from the floor were virtually inaudible to the large majority of delegates. In addition, delegates were deluged by vast quantities of paper. There were 143 amendments from the branches to the main NC resolution and it was difficult to know which of them were before the delegates at a given moment.
"difficult" amendments were gotten rid of in'the resolutions committee which seemed to have an inordinate amount of power in determining whether amendments reached the floor for discussion.
This committee continually asked
the various branches to withdraw their
resolutions.
Trotskyism still presents them with
a problem. One resolution from Hudders-
field stated: "We move the British Commu-
nist movement should call on the world
Communist movement to make a Marxist re-
assessment of the significance of Leon
Trotsky in the interests of historical
accuracy in order to establish his true
position in the development of modern
Marxist-Leninist thinking; weighing up
his positive action against his negative
action."
When the Huddersfield delegate re-
fused to withdraw this resolution after
the repeated demands of the platforn,
they simply refused to allow it onto the
floor.
The conference reveals that the
YCL is today the most dynamic section of
the Communist movement and the potential
for the growth of an effective opposition
would seem to be high.
MEETING HELD FOR HUGO BLANCO IN LONDON
News of the physical attack on Hugo Blanco* has stirred the Committee for Solidarity with the Victims of Repression in Peru into renewed activity.
Strengthened by the agreement of Bertrand Russell to become Honorary President of the committee, the organization is now embarking on a series of activities to draw the attention of the British Labour movement to the repressive conditions in Peru and especially to the fate of Hugo Blanco and his comrades.
The committee has the support of many prominent individuals, including Mrs. Harold Laski, Isaac Deutscher, Bill Molloy, M.P., Syd Bidwell, M.P., Hamza Halevi and Ernie Roberts of the Amalgamated Engineering Union (in his personal capacity).
The campaign was launched at a well-attended meeting in London's Caxton Hall, with Roger Protz, editor of Labour Worker, in the chair. The principal speaker was Bill Molloy, Labour M.P. for Ealing North, who has been very active in
* For details about the assault committed by prison guards see World Outlook, May 5, p. 457.
the cause of Hugo Blanco and who has had
several interviews with the Peruvian am-
bassador on his behalf.
Other speakers included Pat Jordan
of The Week and Edward Crawford of So-
cialist Current.
The most conspicuous absentee from
the Hugo Blanco campaign is the Healyite
Socialist Labour League, which has con-
fined activities so far on behalf of the
imprisoned Peruvian Trotskyist to passing
a resolution at their annual conference.
A feature of the meeting was the
sale of a pamphlet Land or Death -- the
Case of Hugo Blanco, and red-and-gold
badges with the words, "FREE -- LIBRE --
HUGO BLANCO."
Bundle orders for the pamphlet at
5 shillings for 12 (to sell at 6d each)
and for the badges at 9 pence each should
be sent to the treasurer:
Mrs. M. van Gelderen,
6 Aycliffe Road,
London, W.12,
England.
It would be appreciated if a small
amount could be included for postage.
KURON RELEASED ~- MODZELEWSKI STILL IN PRISON
Gomulka's political prisoner, the young Polish Communist Jacek Kuron, was released from confinement in May. A graduate student at Warsaw University, he was jailed in July 1965 together with Karol Modzelewski for openly expressing disagreement with the Communist party bureaucrats and advocating a revolutionary Marxist line. Kuron had served more than two thirds of his three-year sentence.
Modzelewski, who was given a threeand-a-half-year sentence, remains behind pars. It is a mystery why Gomulka's judges handed out different terms to the defendants unless they wished to pretend that the punishments were somehow justified. Both were well-known members of the Socialist Youth Union at Warsaw University and shared the same views which they set forth in an Open Letter to the Party. (This remarkable document will soon be published in an English edition by Merit Publishers, New York.)