What Way for Youth? IV
By JAMES NOWELL
THE Berlin rally is the most spectacular of recent attempts to direct youthful energy and enthusiasm to political channels. But it is not the only attempt. Today all four of our main parties urge the youth of Britain to declare a political allegiance before they are past schdol age. Each party has its youth movement, and membership ranges frbm the 180,000 Young Conservatives down to the 3,500 members of the militant Young Communist League. They are not, of course, all under 21; the general range is from 15-30 years of age, with the 17-25s dominating the picture. I notice, incidentally, a tendency —I would like to say no more—for the Young Communists and the Labour League of Youth to attract under-21s, while the Young Liberals and Young Conservatives hold most of their members from the middle-twenties.
The first political youth movement was the Liberal, founded in 1903. Then, after their defeat at the polls in 1906, the Con- servatives formed the Junior Imperial League which flourished— apart from the two war periods—until the Young Conservative organisation took its place in 1944. "The Imps" reached a spectacular peak membership of 200,000 in 1930, and between the wars they, the Young Liberals, the Labour League of Youth (founded 1924-26) and the Young Communist League (founded 1922) attracted extensive support from young people between the ages of 15 and 25.
But there was nothing to cause distress in these movements except in the Young Communist League and possibly in some of the more militant Labour areas. There was not a sinister purpose as behind the Hitler Youth or the Russian Komsomol. Our movements were on the whole simply youth clubs that mixed social activities with a small proportion 'of political, and gave young people an elementary education in civics. There were talks, debates, mock elections, lectures on government and so on. Each organisation was definitely the junior section of its party, and any say it had in party affairs was by courtesy, not by right. But 1945 brought a change of idea in all the parties, and the junior movement in the Conservative, Liberal and Labour Parties now has equal representation on the Party councils with each of the other sections of the Party. In 1950, indeed, a Young Conservative was elected chairman of the National Union of Conservative and Unionist Associations.t. .
So the youth movements are now an integral and responsible part of each of the parties. But one must not exaggerate their political atmosphere. The leaders sit on the principal committees of their party, but the rank and file are still held together by a Wide •variety of non-political social activities, with politics dropped in according to taste. What is the use of them, then, if they Are not entirely political? Well, a redeeming feature of British youth is• that even today the majority are not mad on politics. They are interested, but they like to enjoy themselves as well. So the partiq cater for them. But there is a great practical point, too. A junior movement does enable younger men and women to show their pace as organisers and administrators. If there were no youth movement, a young man or woman might join the senior party, but then have to wait years before ever having a real say in anything or being given anything responsible to do. And a responsible junior movement does leaven the party loaf and broaden the party outlook.
So far I have ignored the Young Communist League. I have ignored it deliberately because it is different,dangerously different, from all the others. It is not just another youth movement. It is not simply a junior branch of the Communist Party. It is inde- pendent and militant, and aims not simply to educate its members in theVirtues of the Communist Party, but to make the League an active political weapon in its own right. Downtrodden youth must fight for its rights, and it is the job of the young Communist Leaguer to focus and lead that struggle. To quote itself: "Our aim' is to develop every new member of the League into a well-informed, capable, confident young Communist, able to discuss and argue our case and to convince others, able to guide his or her activities in life with a Socialist out- look, able to take a leading part in the building of Socialism when the workers have won power."
The League runs classes and schools so that "we shall be better equipped in the day-to-day struggle . . . able to lead young people into action." The theory of Marxism, it says, "is, above all else, a guide to ?ction" (its own underlining). To this end new members are given a course of instruction of three lessons in the aims and principles of the Y.C.L., and it is from the tutors' lecture-notes that my quotations are taken. Students are instructed in the evils of capitalism, in the virtues of Soviet Socialism and in the work of the League and their tasks as members. On every member is placed the duty of winning others for Socialism, and they are instructed : "We must fight on anything which arouses indignation amongst young people so that they are prepared to have a go, even if it's just a question of the quality or quantity of canteen dinners at work or school, or the tea break, tte. (tutor can think of many examples). It is in the struggle to secure the immediate needs of youth that young people will learn from their own experience to understand the existence of the class struggle between workers and their bosses, will discover the best ways to fight that struggle and will realise the need for Socialism and power in the hands of the workers. They can never learn this from propaganda alone."
This is' the British Young Communist League, with a purpose it makes no effort to conceal. Admittedly its membership is small, but I would not like to guess at the number of unlisted sympathisers. And members do not conceal the fact that they are willing at any time to join with any other youth movement for any purpose so long as there's a fight in view. Their nearest neighbours politically are the Labour League of Youth, but it is significant of the fundamental difference in concept between the Young Communist League and the other party youth move- ments that in 1936 the Labour Party had to disband the Youth League organisation, its annual national conference, and cease publication of the movement's paper because Communist infiltra- tion had led to the use of the as platforms for themselves. Not until 1948, indeed, did they Nd able officially again to' rebuild the structure of the League.
In this sort of undermining activity can be seen the crux of the problem today. Political youth movements are here to stay. The Conservative, Liberal and Labour Parties, for all their differences, embody in their youth movements elements essentially British—something of the tolerance and good temper of British life. But youth is idealist and vigorous and blind it it feels it has something to fight for ; and the Communists make things for youth to fight for, and paint pictures of prosperity and justice and culture. Can the British parties, and the Labour Party especially—for it is the most threatened—guard their flank and keep their own movements prospering? Can public opinion recognise the difference between the purposes of the Communist and of the other party youth movements ? For the time is past when opinion should condemn the dragging of youth into politics. Let us regret the development if we wish, but let us not condemn them ; for they are in being, and, now that they are challenged by a shrewd and relentless interloper ready to harness all the vivid idealism of the young, opinion should stand by all Party move- ments that still remain essentially British.
Previous page
