National Democratic Struggle and the Que8tion of Transformation

My most important objection to Hudson's article ('The Freedom Charter and the theory of national democratic revolution, In Transformation 1) Is his handling of the strategy of national democratic revolution. He falls to reflect anything of the long history of the concept In our own South African struggle. The question of a socialist strategy for South Africa goes back to at least 1915 with the formation of the International Socialist League. Since the 1920s there have been intense debates about the relationships of the socialist struggle to the struggle against national oppression. Needless to say, these debates were not simply academic; they were rooted in questions of organisation, co-operation and campaigning. The significance of the national democratic strategy 1n South Africa today cannot be understood independently of this long, indigenous tradition. To be sure, these South African debates and struggles have, at times, been significantly Influenced by the International socialist movement. Undoubtedly the most notable occasion (strangely not mentioned by Hudson) was the 6th Comintern Conference in 1928. It was at this conference that, after a fierce ideological debate within the CPSA, cotiminists like Jimny La Guma were supported by the Comintern in their contention that the path to socialism in South Africa lay down the road of struggle against national oppression. From then on the CPSA was to 'work within the embryonic national movements', especially the ANC, to transform it Into a 'fighting nationalist revolutionary organisation against the white bourgeoisie and British imperialists, based on trade unions and peasants organisations, etc' (in Oavies et al, 1984: 292). Not only does Hudson Ignore the specific South African history of this strategy, but he also fails to notice how. In the last 24 months of mass struggle, it has become necessary to deepen our understanding of national democratic struggle. In particular, the countrywide emergence of rudimentary organs of democratic people's power has greatly enriched our understanding of transformational possibilities on the terrain of a relatively advanced capitalist country. Hudson displays a consistent inability to distinguish between political strategies, tactics (choices, if you will) that deal, scientifically we hope, with probabilities on the one hand, and metaphysical arguments about logical necessities on the other. He consistently mistakes the former for