DEBATE                                                  TRANSFORMATION 11 (1990)
                  A RESPONSE TO DAVE LEWIS
                                                               Eddie Webster
   I read with great interest the keynote address by David Lewis to UDUSA
 in Transformation 10. It is encouraging to read such unequivocal support for
 critical intellectual work from a respected and prominent trade unionist.
 University-based left intellectuals are often presented with a false dilemma:
 do they succumb to pressures to subordinate their intellectual work to
 particular political tendencies and organisations, or do they retreat into a
 narrow-based careerism?
     By criticising intellectuals for 'the subordinated and rather obsequious
 attitude they adopt to their own work' (1989:64), Lewis makes a strong case
 for an alternative to both 'subordination' and 'privatism'. This alternative
 approach, which could be called critical engagement, makes no pretence at
 'neutrality" and clearly supports the cause of labour. There is an attempt to
 link theory and practice. This engagement is critical, however, because by
 and large this category of intellectuals does not subordinate itself to a
 particular tendency in the trade union movement.
   I do however wish to disagree with David on one point. He suggests, quite
 rightly, that 'political responsibility is a much abused concept. It is frequently
 used to suppress debate and to intimidate opponents'(1989:68). But to give,
 as an example of the suppression of debate, the response of the editors of
 the South African Labour Bulletin in 1980 to the registration debate is
 misleading.
   As a member of the Editorial Board at that time my recollection of events
 is that most of the editors actively encouraged the debate. Of course feelings
 were running high and pressure was put on certain editors to respond to the
 immediate interests of particular tendencies in the debate.
   What is important, however, about this incident is that considerable debate
 took place inside the Editorial Board and we successfully resisted the
 position dominant in FOSATU at that time that the arguments in favour of
 registration were too sensitive to be published. In November 1979 a memo
 written on behalf of the Western Province General Workers Union was
 published in the SALB. A reply supporting registration was published in
 September 1981. This was followed by a further six articles arguing either for
 or against registration.
   Contrary to what David suggests, the registration debate is a clear example
 of intellectuals not subordinating themselves to a particular tendency or
                                           90


TRANSFORMATION                                                        WEBSTER
organisational interest in the labour movement. The publication of the
registration debate was to be a turning point in the history of the SALB. Not
only did the SALB provide the only written record of this important debate,
but it established the SALB as a genuinely independent forum for the
democratic trade union movement.
                                      91