EDITORIAL

With the present issue our magazine commences the second year of its publication, its first having been successful enough to ensure its appearance for a further year. Whilst keeping to the thematic approach we adopted after our first number, we have in this instance decided to abandon the purely geographical/historical format and concentrate instead upon the general problem of revolutionary policy in a situation where Marxists find themselves in the leadership of strike action. The examples we have selected from three continents span a period of just under 20 years.

The aim of this selection is to show the r61e of those who claimed to be revolutionaries and the way in which they sought to apply their programme in the course of striving to lead major class battles. We try to show that the difference between Social Democratic or Stalinist leadership of strikes and that by revolutionaries involves a more comprehensive understanding of the class struggle and the way to wage it, and that this is reflected in the structure of the organisation of the strike, the different relationship between the leadership and the rank and file, and the elaboration of new methods of struggle and programme. The accounts chosen show the real life of the movement in its first-hand experiences, as well as illustrating the differences between those who see themselves as revolutionaries as to the meaning of what had transpired. Defeat as well as victory figure here, and each has its lessons for the future.

As always, our intention is not to hand out readily-digested answers to those who prefer not to do their own thinking, but to place in front of thoughtful revolutionaries a real arsenal of ideas and experiences for when they, too, assume their rightful place at the head of the working class movement.

Editorial Board
Revolutionary History