Our school is Sir William Turner's School, Redcar. It's a grammar school and a member of the H.M.C. Although it has changed quite considerably, the Headmaster, S.G. Barker, MA, JP etc., still tries to run it like the public school it used to be, taking over the role of local squire as well. The school, designed for 700 boys, now houses some 870. Of these, 200 and over are 6th-formers. Overcrowding, the general sterility of life at S.W.T., the petty rules and regulations, the lack of a social foca point or any real identity or feeling of belonging, were beginning to produce feelings of alienation; for the most part "incoherent", more able to analyse their feelings and discover the causes. Overall there was a general feeling of gloom and unhappiness.
Some of us got together to mobilise this latent power and turn apathy into a radica orce. What most people needed was convincing that real change was feasible. We had a small core of activists and a large group of tacit supporters warang quieuy in une wings tor us to do the initial dirty work. We circulated a broadsheet and started discussions in small groups about the situation and what was to be done We wanted the large scout hut, used one evening a week by 8 scouts, turned over to the 6th as a common room where coffee machines, record-players, darts boards etc. would be installed. Also, an end to the ban on smoking, at least for form 6; an end to the persecution of "long haired tickos" (sic); an end to compulsory religious assembly, games, and many other things. We sounded out some of the staff Trotskyist case. Against him was Monty Johnand it seemed that some at least were in favour of staff/student dialogue, and many other of our proposals. But as it is U.C.C.A. form time and as they fear for their jobs, we decided to act "constitutionally':— we decided to establish a branch of the debating society which would be open to the 5th & 6th forms and would discuss both the problems we faced here and also those of education in general. We got a lot of support for this, including all the prefects and other "respectable" members of the 6th. A master agreed to put the idea to the head. As it turned out he never got a it had to be reopened for a number of reasons. chance: things suddenly came to a head.
On the morning of speech day meeting to discuss both the farce of the occasion and to show how it tied in with the Head's the third world, by trying to forge an alliance general attitude towards us. Basically the objec- with the national bourgeoisie to forge a natiotions were to the fact that the head bathes in the reflected glory of the 5th & 6th ("A" and "O" levels, Oxbridge schols., rugby, drama, etc.) while he treats them as children the rest t the time. His preoccupation with Oxbridge proved that Trotsky had been 100% correct candidates, his lack of interest in those applying to humble polytechnics, his refusal to Revolution and would win cadres because this interview a boy about university because his hair was too long; these were all brought up and developed countries. The second fundamental ideas for disrupting speech day put forward. It was decided that the most effective method would be to totally ignore the occasion, refusing to sing, clap or participate in any way. This would protect us from being picked on as ringleaders as it is very difficult to spot at a distance who is singing and who is merely miming. This worked perfectly. The atmosphere was electric and many of the 3rd and 4th form boys rose to the occasion by spontaneously stomping and jeering. It was the worst speech day ever. It was the next day that trouble started.
There was no bollocking in morning assembly from S.G.B. - an ominous sign. Then one of our staff-room contacts told us that some of the more reactionary teachers were getting worried - speech day today, them tomorrow. One. more worried than the others, was a certain D.A. Gillett, a person on the same lines as that shit Gardiner, only his thing is rugby, not drama. A word about this cunt Gillett; with the appearance of a gross and boorish slob, he spends nan une time ne snowd de teaching history in hysterical anti-communist diatribes and the other half in naking fun of othe nasters and boys behind their backs. If he once takes a dislike to you, which is inevitable if you aren't wild about rugby/history, you can expect hell. Physically, he will lift you off the floor by the short hairs, deadleg you, clout you across the head on any pretext he can find You will be continually harassed on petty thing: one comrade was sent to the head for wearing a beige pullover instead of the regulation mid grey, although half the school does so), mocked openly for any physical defect you may have and have your life made as miserable as he ca make it.
Anyway, this bastard Gillett went to the like aienation and "dialogue as being "alien to the school, picked up second-hand from some third-rate protest university"
However, the head agreed that many of our demands were reasonable, but he refused to do anything for fear of appearing to bow to mob rule (sic). He said he would look into it after Christmas. Although we won a sort of victory he would have no hesitation in expelling trouble makers. Also some of the staff support has cooled through fear of the sack. We don't instrengthen it for the January offensive. We are also keeping up our programme of quiet agitation at school. But whatever happens, that fat cunt. Gillett is shortly going to get what's coming to him. lism in our epoch.
Monty Johnstone then spoke for the Communist Party. He was disappointed. He had hoped for a serious discussion on the ideology of Trotskyism and they had instead been trea ted to a rabble-rousing speech. A movement should not be judged by the figures of people we are now severely restricted as the head stated in it alone, but even so, the Fourth International was a puny organisation. Instead of arguing, Mandel had expressed precisely what was wrong with Trotskyism, the substitution of wishful thinking for an analysis of the objective situation. Lenin had never believed in a revolutionary situation existing where a majority of the population had not been won over to th side of the revolutionary forces. October was a precise calculation of the forces on the evidence of the elections to the Soviets that the masses had come over. In France how far could the workers be expected to go when the elections occasion for an immediate victorious revolution. When describing a revolutionary situation Lenin gave very careful criteria: - when it was impossible for the ruling class to continue without change; when the suffering of the workers was more acute than usual; When there was a considerable increase in the activity of the masses. How could the CP deny that France, May 1968, fell into these categories. How could they explain the failure of '36, followed by the failure of '45 and '68. In Spain instead of help. ing the revolution to victory, the CP had helped create a new bourgeois army. Every one of the bourgeois generals eventually betrayed the