All Hail The Scottish Workers Republic!

Welcome to the Scottish Republican Socialist Newsletter.
We believe in independence and socialism that will only be achieved through National Liberation struggle.

Thursday, 25 June 2009

Green socialists on James Connolly


Green socialists on James Connolly

Last month was the anniversary of the death of James Connolly. In this article John Wight examines the life and times of this great socialist figure.

May 12th each year marks the anniversary of the death of James Connolly.

Executed in Dublin by the British after taking up arms in the 1916 Easter Rising to not only liberate Ireland from 800 years of uninterrupted occupation, but more importantly to stir the Irish working class from its slumber and inspire it to rise from its knees, Connolly died a martyr to the cause of self determination and social and economic justice.

The story of that rising - of the Irishmen and women who so bravely took on the might of British imperialism and held out for four days; of the leaders who were rounded up afterwards and executed, each of them defiant to the end; of the aftermath and the armed struggle waged by the IRA under Michael Collins, leading to the formation in 1921 of the Free State Republic and a two year civil war - has been well documented.

The life of James Connolly, however, in its ceaseless and unwavering commitment to the cause of socialism, despite obstacles that would have deterred even the most dedicated of his kind, is surely worthy of special tribute.

It is a story which begins amid the grinding poverty of a disease-ridden slum populated by Irish immigrants in Edinburgh towards the end of the 19th century.

Anti-Irish sentiment in Scotland was commonplace during this period, with the poison of religious sectarianism exacerbated by the poverty suffered by the working class as a direct result of a laissez faire capitalist model which pitted all against all in an unremitting struggle for the crumbs from the bosses’ table. In Edinburgh poor Irish immigrants were squeezed together in their own ghetto in the centre of the city. The locals named it 'Little Ireland' and here the ravages of poverty – in the shape of alcoholism, crime, and diseases such as cholera and typhus - were part of every day life.

James Connolly, born 5 June 1868, was the youngest of three brothers. At the age of ten, after his mother died, he lied about his age and began work in the print-shop of a local newspaper.

At an age when his life should have consisted of going to school and running free with other boys his age, here he was being introduced to the cruel world of wage slavery, a mere child experiencing all the dirt and noise and smells of heavy machinery amongst the worn and broken men who toiled long hours for starvation wages.

Desperate to escape such a fate, at the age of fourteen Connolly once again lied about his age and joined the British Army. He was posted to Ireland, the birthplace of his parents, and it was there, witnessing the atrocities being carried out against the Irish people by the British Army, that the seeds of class consciousness and hatred of oppression were planted.

It was also during this period that he met his wife, Lillie Reynolds, who worked as a domestic servant for a prominent unionist family in Dublin. Lillie would remain by her husband’s side to the end of his life, sharing in his triumphs and defeats, her dedication to the struggle marking her out as an outstanding figure in her own right.

Connolly deserted from the British Army at the age of 21, moved back to Scotland with Lillie and there began his involvement in the class struggle, joining the Socialist League in 1889 whilst living in Dundee, an organisation committed to revolutionary internationalism which received the endorsement of Friedrich Engels.

A year later he moved to Edinburgh with his wife and by then two children, where he returned to the grind of punishing manual labour, picking up work here and there as he and his wife struggled against poverty. Throughout, Connolly continued to find time for politics and he became secretary of the Scottish Socialist Federation. He entered a municipal election as a socialist candidate around this period and received 263 votes.

In 1896 Connolly returned to Dublin, a city he'd grown to love while posted there in the British Army, in response to an offer to work for the Dublin Socialist Club. Shortly after his arrival he founded the Irish Socialist Republican Party. In his first statement on behalf of the ISRP, he wrote:

“The struggle for Irish freedom has two aspects: it is national and it is social. The national ideal can never be realised until Ireland stands forth before the world as a nation, free and independent. It is social and economic, because no matter what the form of government may be, as long as one class owns as private property the land and the instruments of labour from which mankind derive their substance, that class will always have it in their power to plunder and enslave the remainder of their fellow creatures.”

Connolly had decided by this point that the two strands of revolutionary thought in Ireland, national liberation and socialism, rather than being antagonistic, were in fact complementary.

This was a view which ran counter to the prevailing current of socialist theory that obtained across continental Europe at that time, which held to the view that the struggle for socialism must reach across the false divisions of national, ethnic and cultural identity. Nationalist movements as such were scorned and vilified, deemed petit bourgeois in both character and design.

But those European socialists had no experience of living under the yoke of imperialism, and thus for them the national question could only ever exist in the abstract.

Some of Connolly’s most powerful writing and thinking focused on this very issue, demonstrating a development which placed him at the vanguard of Marxist revolutionary theory.

“The struggle for socialism and national liberation cannot and must not be separated.”

“The cause of labour is the cause of Ireland; the cause of Ireland is the cause of Labour.”

Emphasising his status as a theoretician of the first rank, Connolly was also an early champion of women's rights.

“The worker is the slave of capitalist society, the female worker is the slave of that slave.”

In 1903, as work and finances in Dublin dwindled, Connolly moved to the United States. He'd visited there the year before; travelling across the country lecturing on political philosophy and trade unionism, and his lectures had received a warm reception and much praise from leading figures within the nascent US socialist movement of the period, in particular Daniel De Leon.

After a hard initial few years in his adopted country, Connolly eventually managed to find stable work, and in 1906 became a paid organiser for the recently formed Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), led by the legendary Big Bill Haywood. He also joined the American Socialist Labor Party and founded a monthly newspaper, The Harp, with which he aimed to reach the East Coast's huge Irish immigrant population.

Largely due to Connolly's focus on Irish immigrants, he and De Leon soon split. De Leon, an orthodox Marxist, abhorred Connolly's belief that Marxism should be adapted to varying cultures and traditions if a nation of immigrants was to be mobilized in the cause.

The split was acrimonious, Connolly accusing De Leon of being elitist, De Leon questioning Connolly's methods and grasp of Marxist theory and practice. However, Connolly continued on the path he had chosen, and it was obvious by now that a large part of his motivation in doing so was an increasing homesickness for his beloved Ireland.

In 1910 his dream of returning to Ireland became reality. He returned after being invited to become national organizer for the newly-formed Socialist Party of Ireland. Soon after his return he published a number of pamphlets, one of which, Labour in Irish History, was a major step in the development of an understanding of Irish history from a Marxist viewpoint.

By now possessing an unshakable belief that any hope of revolution lay with the trade union movement, Connolly joined with Larkin in his Irish Transport and General Workers Union. Connolly moved north to Belfast to organize for the ITGWU, hoping to smash down the barriers of religious sectarianism and unite the working class in the shipyards around which the city was built.

He had little success.

In 1913 he moved back to Dublin to join Larkin in the titanic struggle which began when the Dublin employers locked out thousands of workers in an attempt to break the increasing influence and strength of the ITGWU.

A protest meeting of the workers was held despite a ban on such meetings having been ordered by the authorities. It was savagely attacked and broken up by baton-wielding police and afterwards Connolly was arrested. He refused bail for good behaviour and was sentenced to three months in prison. Immediately embarking on a hunger strike, he was released after just one week.

Connolly's first task upon his release was to form a workers' militia. Never again, he vowed, would workers be trampled into the ground by police horses or beaten down under police batons. He called this new militia, which comprised around 250 volunteers, the Irish Citizen Army (ICA). The day after its formation, Connolly spoke at a meeting.

“Listen to me, I am going to talk sedition. The next time we are out on a march, I want to be accompanied by four battalions of trained men.”

When Larkin left Ireland for a fundraising tour of the United States in 1914, Connolly became acting general secretary of the ITGWU. The same year, watching as millions of workers went off to be slaughtered in the First World War, he was devastated.

“This war appears to me as the most fearful crime of the centuries. In it the working class are to be sacrificed so that a small clique of rulers and armament makers may sate their lust for power and their greed for wealth. Nations are to be obliterated, progress stopped, and international hatreds erected into deities to be worshipped.”

All over Europe even socialists succumbed to the poison of patriotism, joining the war efforts in their respective countries and thus heralding the end of the Second International in which socialist parties and figures representing Europe's toiling masses had vowed to campaign against the war and the slaughter of worker by worker. Connolly's analysis of the war was scathing:

“I know of no foreign enemy in this country except the British Government. Should a German army land in Ireland tomorrow, we should be perfectly justified in joining it, if by so doing we could rid this country for once and for all the Brigand Empire that drags us unwillingly to war.”

The British Government attempted to buy off Irish sentiment in support of outright independence from the Empire with a Home Rule bill, which in effect promised devolved power if the political leadership in Ireland at that time - people like John Redmond of the Irish Parliamentary Party - would agree to the recruitment of Irish workers to be slaughtered in the trenches in an imperialist war.

The bill split the Irish national liberation movement into those who supported it as a step towards outright independence and those, like Connolly, who were totally against it.

“If you are itching for a rifle, itching to fight, have a country of your own. Better to fight for our own country than the robber empire. If ever you shoulder a rifle, let it be for Ireland.”

It was now that Connolly's position shifted with regard to physical force. Previously, he had wanted no part in it, eschewing it as reckless and contrary to Marxist doctrine of a mass revolution of the working class, whereby consciousness precedes action.

But with the retreat of the European socialists, and the failure of the trade unions to act against the war, Connolly despaired of ever achieving the society he’d dedicated his life to without armed struggle.

The Irish Republican Brotherhood was planning just the kind of insurrection which Connolly had in mind. Connolly had taken a dim view of the IRB and its leaders up until then, viewing them as a bunch of feckless romantics. However, when they revealed their plans to him at a private meeting – plans involving the mobilization of 11,000 volunteers throughout the country - and that a large shipment of arms was on the way from Germany, he agreed to join them with his own ICA volunteers.

Connolly was respected enough by the IRB leaders, in particular Padrig Pearse, to be appointed military commander of Dublin's rebel forces. Pearse, a school teacher, was certain that they would all be slaughtered. He was imbued with a belief in the necessity of a blood sacrifice to awaken the Irish people, holding obscurantist beliefs that were steeped in Irish history and the Gaelic culture. But for all that he was no less committed to his cause than Connolly to his, and as a consequence they soon developed a grudging respect for one another.

In the end, the plan for the Easter Sunday insurrection went awry. Rebel army volunteers deployed out with Dublin received conflicting orders and failed to mobilize, leaving Dublin isolated. After postponing the insurrection for a day due to the confusion, the Dublin leadership decided to press on regardless. Connolly assembled his men outside their union headquarters, known as Liberty Hall. By now he knew their chances for success were slim at best, and indeed it is said that he turned to a trusted aide as the men formed up and, in a low voice, announced:

“We’re going out to be slaughtered.”

With Pearse beside him, Connolly marched his men to their military objective, the General Post Office building on O'Connell Street in the centre of Dublin. They rushed in, took control of the building, and barricaded themselves in to await the inevitable military response from the British.

Connolly, Pearse and another leader of the insurrection, Thomas C. Clarke, marched out into the street to read out the now famous proclamation of the Irish Republic. In it, at Connolly's insistence, the rights of the Irish people to the ownership of Ireland, to equality and to the ending religious of sectarianism were included.

“The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and of all its parts, cherishing all the children of the nation equally, and oblivious to the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past.”

After holding out against the British Army for four days, during which Connolly inspired the men under his command with his determination and courage, in the process suffering wounds to the chest and ankle, British reinforcements and artillery arrived from the mainland to begin shelling rebel positions throughout the city.

The leadership, upon realizing the hopelessness of their situation, and in order to prevent the deaths of any more of their volunteers and civilians in a losing fight, reluctantly decided to surrender.

In the aftermath the ringleaders of the Rising were executed. Connolly was saved for last, the severity of his wounds failing to deter the British from taking their revenge as they tied him to a chair in the courtyard of Kilmainham Jail, where he was executed by firing squad.

At his court martial days prior, held in his cell in deference to those same wounds, James Connolly made the following statement:

“Believing that the British Government has no right in Ireland, never had any right in Ireland, and never can have any right in Ireland, the presence, in any one generation of Irishmen, of even a respectable minority, ready to die to affirm that truth, makes the Government forever a usurpation and a crime against human progress.

“I personally thank God that I have lived to see the day when thousands of Irishmen and boys, and hundreds of women and girls, were ready to affirm that truth, and to attest to it with their lives if need be.”

When news of the Rising was released, some leading European socialists dismissed it as a putsch of little or no great consequence. However, Lenin was not one of those, and went so far as to refute such criticisms in his article, The Results of the Discussion on self-determination. To him the Easter Rising stood as an example of the awakening of the proletariat that was taking place across Europe, providing hope that world revolution was on the horizon. He wrote:

“Those who can term such a rising a Putsch are either the worst kind of reactionaries or hopeless doctrinaires, incapable of imagining the social revolution as a living phenomenon.”

Today a statue of James Connolly stands pride of place in the centre of Dublin. A brass engraving of the Proclamation of the Irish Republic also sits pride of place in the window of the General Post Office headquarters, where Connolly made his stand for the liberty of his nation and his class during those four fateful days in April 1916.

Tuesday, 23 June 2009

Scotland's Republican Socialists

The Scottish Socialist Freedom Group are the real Republican Socialists in Scotland who support the following:

Campaign for Yes in an independence referendum.

Unity amongst the pro-independence left.

A green socialist republic for Scotland.

To join the Scottish Socialist Freedom Group send an email to redlarry1962@googlemail.com

We represent a non-sectarian group that is cross-party politics of the republican socialist left in Scotland.

All are welcome who endorse our manifesto.

Click here to read our website

Tuesday, 9 June 2009

Scottish Independence petition

Click here to sign the petition

To: The Scottish Government

We demand that Scotland becomes a full sovereign Independent country. We demand this because we don't believe the unionist lies of Labour and believe that Scotland would be a wealthier, healthier, smarter, safer & more just nation with Independence.

Scotland is being held back under the UK! We want Scotland to do what Ireland, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, Belgium, Finland, Sweden, and Andorra have all done (with either similar or even smaller populations to Scotland) and to MOVE FORWARD and create a better future for everyone!

We will make our voice be heard and we will demand Independence & Freedom for Scotland!! The Scottish people have a right to self determination & have the right to decide our nations future in a referendum to allow the people of Scotland to vote for a new beginning for Scotland with Independence!!

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

Sunday, 24 May 2009

Aims and Principles of The Scottish Socialist Freedom Group

From the SSFG website

Aims and Principles of the The Scottish Socialist Freedom Group

The SSFG is an organisation of revolutionary class struggle that will result in an Independent Socialist Republic of Scotland. We aim for the abolition of the United Kingdom, all hierarchy, and work for the creation of a world-wide classless society.

Capitalism is based on the exploitation of the working class by the ruling class. But inequality and exploitation are also expressed in terms of race, gender, religion, sexuality, health, ability and age, and in these ways one section of the working class oppresses another. This divides us which benefits the ruling class.

We believe that fighting racism and sexism is as important as other aspects of the class struggle. A Republic of Scotland cannot be achieved while sexism and racism still exist. In order to be effective in their struggle against their oppression both within society and within the working class, women, lesbians and gays, and black people may at times need to organise independently. However, this should be as working class people as cross-class movements hide real class differences and achieve little for them. Full emancipation cannot be achieved without the abolition of capitalism and this cannot be done without the destruction of its founder, the United Kingdom.

As well as exploiting and oppressing the majority of people, Capitalism threatens the world through war and the destruction of the environment.

It is not possible to abolish Capitalism without a revolution, which will arise out of class conflict. The ruling class must be completely overthrown to achieve true Scottish Independence and freedom. Because the ruling class will not relinquish power without their use of armed force, this revolution will be a time of violence as well as liberation.

Unions by their very nature cannot become vehicles for the revolutionary transformation of society. They have to be accepted by capitalism in order to function and so cannot play a part in its overthrow. Trades unions divide the working class (between employed and unemployed, trade and craft, skilled and unskilled, etc). Even syndicalist unions are constrained by the fundamental nature of unionism. The unions have to be able to control its membership in order to make deals with management. Their aim, through negotiation, is to achieve a fairer form of exploitation of the workforce. The interests of leaders and representatives will always be different from ours. The boss class is our enemy, and while we must fight for better conditions from it, we have to realise that reforms we may achieve today may be taken away tomorrow. Our ultimate aim must be the complete abolition of wage slavery. Working within the unions can never achieve this.

Genuine liberation can only come about through the revolutionary self activity of the working class on a mass scale. A Socialist Scotland means not only co-operation between equals, but active involvement in the shaping and creating of that society during and after the revolution As Scottish Republicans we organise in all areas of life to try to advance the revolutionary process. We believe a strong organisation is necessary to help us to this end. Unlike other so-called socialists we do not want power or control for our organisation. We recognise that the revolution can only be carried out directly by the working class. However, the revolution must be preceded by organisations able to convince people of the Socialist Republican alternative and method. We participate in struggle as Scottish Republicans. We reject sectarianism and work for a united revolutionary Scottish Freedom movement.

The Declaration of the Scottish Republic


To the people of Scotland: Scotland, through us, strikes for her freedom. We declare the right of the people of Scotland to the ownership of Scotland, and to the control of Scottish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible. The long usurpation of that right by a foreign people and government has not extinguished the right, nor can it ever be extinguished. In every generation the Scottish people have asserted their right to national freedom and sovereignty, they have asserted it both in arms and through political institutions. Standing on that right, we hereby proclaim the Scottish Republic as a Sovereign Socialist Independenct State, and we pledge our lives and the lives of our comrades to the cause of its freedom, of its welfare, and its place among the Independent nations of the World.

The Scottish Republic is entitled to the allegiance of every Scot. The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and of all its parts, oblivious to the differences carefully fostered by a foreign government, which have divided us in the past and present.

We place the cause of the Scottish Republic under the protection of the sovereignty of the Scottish people, and we demand that all those who serve the cause honour it with dignity. In this supreme hour the Scottish nation must sacrifice themselves for the common good, proving itself worthy of the destiny to which it is called.


Signed by

The Scottish Socialist Freedom Group

Sunday, 12 April 2009

James Connolly: The Great Irish Revolutionary


A system of society in which the workshops, factories, docks, railways, shipyards, &c., shall be owned by the nation, but administered by the Industrial Unions of the respective industries, organised as above, seems best calculated to secure the highest form of industrial efficiency, combined with the greatest amount of individual freedom from state despotism. Such a system would, we believe, realise for Ireland the most radiant hopes of all her heroes and martyrs. - James Connolly

James Connolly, the great Irish revolutionary was martyred in 1916, and is a man whose revolutionary legacy is, at any one time, being claimed by many diverse groups, many of them diametrically opposed to each other, from anarchists, to nationalists to communists and socialists.

So let us start at the beginning, where it all began. Connolly was born in 1868 to Irish immigrant parents in the Cowgate area of Edinburgh, Scotland. His father worked as a manure carter, removing dung from the streets at night, and his mother was a domestic servant who suffered from chronic bronchitis and died young from that ailment.

Anti-Irish feeling in Edinburgh at the time was so bad that most Irish were forced to live in the slums of the Cowgate and the Grassmarket areas, which became known as ‘Little Ireland’. Overcrowding, poverty, disease, drunkenness and unemployment were rife, most of the jobs available to Irish were selling second-hand clothes and working as a porter or a carter.

Though he attended St. Patricks School in Cowgate, at the age of ten he left in order to enter the workforce. He got a job with Edinburgh’s Evening News newspaper, where he worked as a ‘Devil’, cleaning inky rollers and fetching beer and food for the adult workers. His brother Thomas also worked with the same newspaper. In 1882, aged 14, he joined the British Army in which he remained for nearly seven years, all of it in Ireland, where he witnessed first hand the terrible treatment of the Irish people at the hands of the British. The mistreatment of the Irish by the British and the landlords led to Connolly forming an intense hatred of the British Army.

In 1889 while living in Dundee James first got involved in socialist politics joining the Socialist League while his older brother John was involved in a free speech campaign alongside the Social Democratic Federation and the local Trades Council.

He became active in Socialist and trade union circles and became secretary of the Scottish Socialist Federation, almost by mistake. At the time his brother John was secretary; however, after John spoke at a rally in favour of the eight-hour day he was fired from his job with the corporation, so while he looked for work, James took over as secretary. During this time, Connolly became involved with the Independent Labour Party which Keir Hardie formed in 1893.

By 1892 he was involved in the Scottish Socialist Federation, acting as its secretary from 1895, but by 1896 he had gone to Dublin to take up the full time job of secretary of the Dublin Socialist Society, which at his instigation quickly evolved into the Irish Socialist Republican Party (ISRP). The ISRP is regarded by many Irish historians as a party of pivotal importance in the early history of Irish socialism and republicanism. While active as a socialist Connolly was among the founders of the Socialist Labour Party which split from the Social Democratic Federation in 1903. While in America he was member of the Socialist Labor Party of America (1906), the Socialist Party of America (1909) and the Industrial Workers of the World, and founded the Irish Socialist Federation in New York, 1907. On his return to Ireland he was right hand man to James Larkin in the Irish Transport and General Workers Union. In 1913, in response to the Lockout, he, along with an ex-British officer, Jack White, founded the Irish Citizen Army (ICA), an armed and well-trained body of labour men whose aim was to defend workers and strikers, particularly from the frequent brutality of the Dublin Metropolitan Police. Though they only numbered about 250 at most, their goal soon became the establishment of an independent and socialist Irish nation. He founded the Irish Labour Party in 1912 and was a member of the National Executive of the Irish Labour Party when he was executed in 1916.

Syndicalism:

James Connolly was first and foremost a Marxist and a socialist, but when he himself was asked to elaborate upon the specifics of his position he would often advocate revolutionary or radical syndicalism, though he would mostly refer to his ideas as Industrial Unionism rather than syndicalism.

Broadly, Syndicalism refers to ideas, movements and tendencies which share the aim of transforming capitalist society through direct action by the working class on the industrial front, at the point of production. For syndicalists, labour unions are the potential means both of overcoming capitalism and of running society in the interests of the majority. Industry and government in a syndicalist society would be run by labour union federations.

However, in attempts to smear this part of his life and thought, and to promote their own rigidly dogmatic positions, Stalinists have often claimed that the syndicalism professed by Connolly was a youthful misadventure, an aberration that by the time of his martyrdom at the hands of the British following the 1916 Easter Uprising he had all but abandoned. However even a cursory reading of Connolly’s writings dispels this myth propagated by the Stalinists. In his last major work, The Re-Conquest of Ireland, published on the 14th of December 1915, just over five months before the Easter uprising, he fervently advocates syndicalism, or ‘Industrial Unionism’, writing:

The principle of complete unity upon the Industrial plane must be unceasingly sought after; the Industrial union embracing all workers in each industry must replace the multiplicity of unions which now hamper and restrict our operations, multiply our expenses and divide our forces in face of the mutual enemy. With the Industrial Union as our principle of action, branches can be formed to give expression to the need for effective supervision of the affairs of the workshop, shipyard, dock or railway; each branch to consist of the men and women now associated in Labour upon the same technical basis as our craft unions of to-day.

Add to this the concept of one Big Union embracing all, and you have not only the outline of the most effective form of combination for industrial warfare to-day, but also for Social Administration of the Co-operative Commonwealth of the future.

A system of society in which the workshops, factories, docks, railways, shipyards, &c., shall be owned by the nation, but administered by the Industrial Unions of the respective industries, organised as above, seems best calculated to secure the highest form of industrial efficiency, combined with the greatest amount of individual freedom from state despotism. Such a system would, we believe, realise for Ireland the most radiant hopes of all her heroes and martyrs.

It is clear as day that, despite the revisionist claims of Stalinists and others, Connolly was not just an ardent supporter of socialism and Irish liberation, but also a supporter of revolutionary syndicalism. It is impossible to deny that Connolly was a major organizer of The Industrial Workers of the World during his years in the United States, an avowedly syndicalist organization. He was also heavily influenced by Daniel De Leon, and was even for a few years a member of De Leon’s Socialist Labour Party, considering himself for a number of years to be a De Leonist. However it would be wrong to try and place Connolly entirely within one of the two major schools of revolutionary syndicalism, namely De Leonism and anarcho-syndicalism. De Leon’s major revolutionary theory was that socialist revolution could only be achieved by the working-class electing a socialist party to power backed by a power and organized Industrial Union. Connolly thought this tactic to be incorrect, and he turned the model on its head, advocating rather for the Industrial Unions to seize power with the backing of a strong socialist party. The distinction may seem trivial, but it is an important one as it not only keeps him firmly outside of the De Leonist school of thought, but also the anarcho-syndicalist camp, which eschews political organization entirely in favour of industrial organization.

Nationalism

Connolly was also - as he is primarily remembered - a great Irish nationalist, something that has allowed his legacy, for better or for worse, to be claimed by Irish nationalists of all stripes. Unlike the many anarchists who also claim Connolly, I do not reject this part of his life and thought out of hand. Connolly’s Irish patriotism and his avocation of national liberation is one of the major parts of who he was. To excise national liberation from Connolly is to practically remove the memory of the Easter Rebellion. Despite the disingenuous, even outright wrong claims of many anarcho-syndicalists and anarchist communists, this is a type of nationalism that does not assume a common interest (that of national liberation) between the working-class and the national bourgeoisie. Connolly held true to the idea that the national revolution and the social revolution were linked, and that to separate them would mean failure, famously saying:

After Ireland is free, says the patriot who won’t touch Socialism, we will protect all classes, and if you won’t pay your rent you will be evicted same as now. But the evicting party, under command of the sheriff, will wear green uniforms and the Harp without the Crown, and the warrant turning you out on the roadside will be stamped with the arms of the Irish Republic.

Now, isn’t that worth fighting for?

And when you cannot find employment, and, giving up the struggle of life in despair, enter the Poorhouse, the band of the nearest regiment of the Irish army will escort you to the Poorhouse door to the tune of St. Patrick’s Day.

Oh, it will be nice to live in those days…

Now, my friend, I also am Irish, but I’m a bit more logical. The capitalist, I say, is a parasite on industry…

The working class is the victim of this parasite - this human leech, and it is the duty and interest of the working class to use every means in its power to oust this parasite class from the position which enables it to thus prey upon the vitals of Labour.

Therefore, I say, let us organise as a class to meet our masters and destroy their mastership; organise to drive them from their hold upon public life through their political power; organise to wrench from their robber clutch the land and workshops on and in which they enslave us; organise to cleanse our social life from the stain of social cannibalism, from the preying of man upon his fellow man.

One can see that Connolly could not, and would not separate the national and social revolutions, for him Ireland could only truly liberated if capitalism itself was also overthrown. He set the stage, even before Lenin and the Russian Revolution, for the post-Second World War socialist national liberation groups who viewed their cause as invariably part of the internationalist cause to bring down global capitalism and imperialism and establish global communism.

Generally I tend to view any anarchist attack on Connolly’s nationalism as highly facetious and disingenuous. It is based on the flawed anarchist understanding of national liberation and internationalism. This flawed understanding of the struggle also demonstrates why anarchism and anarchists are generally no friends of the struggles for national liberation. Finally, concerning his views on national liberation and the social revolution Connolly makes it clear that the Irish are the working-class and the working-class are Irish, saying:

We are out for Ireland for the Irish. But who are the Irish? Not the rack-renting, slum-owning landlord; not the sweating, profit-grinding capitalist; not the sleek and oily lawyer; not the prostitute pressman - the hired liars of the enemy. Not these are the Irish upon whom the future depends. Not these, but the Irish working class, the only secure foundation upon which a free nation can be reared.

The cause of labour is the cause of Ireland, the cause of Ireland is the cause of labour. They cannot be dissevered. Ireland seeks freedom. Labour seeks that an Ireland free should be the sole mistress of her own destiny, supreme owner of all material things within and upon her soil. Labour seeks to make the free Irish nation the guardian of the interests of the people of Ireland, and to secure that end would vest in that free Irish nation all property rights as against the claims of the individual, with the end in view that the individual may be enriched by the nation, and not by the spoiling of his fellows.

The United Front:

Connolly was also an early proponent of the idea of a united leftist front. He believed, as do I and many other revolutionary socialists, that a successful social revolution can only be carried out by a united front of various anti-capitalists groupings.

In support of the United Front he said:

the development of the fighting spirit is of more importance than the creation of the theoretically perfect organisation; that, indeed, the most theoretically perfect organisation may, because of its very perfection and vastness, be of the greatest possible danger to the revolutionary movement if it tends, or is used, to repress and curb the fighting spirit of comradeship in the rank and file.

For Connolly, the struggle for socialism, for the co-operative commonwealth, for a workers’ republic, for the re-conquest of Ireland; for the new social system, should be conducted on every front. He recognized revolutionary potential in all autonomous working class organisations and movements. He fully supported to the co-operative movement as well as the Irish language movement. Despite rather cynically observing that “you can’t teach a starving man Gaelic” , Connolly saw the Irish language movement as one “of defiant self-reliance and confident trust in a people’s own power of self-emancipation”.

It is because of, not in spite of his views on working-class and left unity that Connolly railed against the evils of craft unionism. Connolly’s attack on craft, or trade, unionism has the same basis as the modern attack on it, namely that it divides the workers into unions based on crafts, despite being employees of the same industry and struggling against the same bosses. This type of unionism of groups like the AFL-CIO plays right into the hands of the bosses and the managers because it turns the workers against themselves in struggles for shorter work days and higher wages, providing for a sort of divide and conquer strategy for the capitalists. To this end Connolly was a supporter of the One Big Union concept put forward by groups like the Industrial Workers of the World. He believed that all workers of all crafts should be united in one union in the common struggle against the bosses and capitalism. On this he said:

The enrolment of the workers in unions patterned closely after the structure of modern industries, and following the organic lines of industrial development, is par excellence the swiftest, safest, and most peaceful form of constructive work the Socialist can engage in. It prepares within the framework of capitalist society the working forms of the Socialist Republic, and thus, while increasing the resisting power of the worker against present encroachments of the capitalist class, it familiarizes him with the idea that the union he is helping to build up is destined to supplant that class in the control of the industry in which he is employed. The power of this idea to transform the dry detail work of trade union organisation into the constructive work of revolutionary Socialism…It invests the sordid details of the daily incidents of the class struggle with a new and beautiful meaning.

I believe today that the only way we can achieve an effective socialist revolution is to follow Connolly’s model of the united front. Do we have to include traitors to the working-class such as authoritarian socialists and centrist social democrats? No, I would not think so, because to do so would mean having to make more than compromises than most revolutionaries would be comfortable with. Again, it is disingenuous of anarchists to claim that any sort of united front would have to include these movements, it is simply an attempt to come up with excuses for not working with those you may have slight ideological differences with. We must recognize that no one group, be it syndicalists, revolutionary democratic socialists, anarchists etc are going to have all the best ideas, militants or organizers, so we must work together for the creation of a socialism, the details can be hammered out later. To deny this is handicap the movement to overthrow capitalism and to only further entrench the shameful sectarianism that divides us.

Parliamentarianism:

As was discussed above, the American syndicalist and revolutionary socialist Daniel De Leon was a major influence on the thought of Connolly. Connolly never abandoned the idea of a revolutionary party of the working-class, as hose who would later come to be known as anarcho-syndicalists would. But, as was also discussed before, Connolly turned the De Leonist revolutionary model on its head, advocating for the seizure of power and the overturning of capitalism by the unions who would in turn be backed by a strong, revolutionary socialist party. De Leon agitated for a political revolution that would in turn lead to a social revolution. Connolly was arguing for a social revolution outright.

Like many revolutionary democratic socialists, Connolly believed that a true revolution could not be made simply by seizing state power away from the capitalists. Capitalism maintains its rule through the instrument of the state, which is the collection of armed forces (police, military, etc.) into a centralized power. In order for capitalism to be replaced, these bodies of capitalism’s agents must be dissolved or disbanded, and replaced by bodies of workers’ defence forces, fully accountable to the new society. Concerning the institutions of the state Connolly said:

The political institutions of today are simply the coercive forces of capitalist society they have grown up out of, and are based upon, territorial divisions of power in the hands of the ruling class in past ages, and were carried over into capitalist society to suit the needs of the capitalist class when that class overthrew the dominion of its predecessors.

Also concerning state ownership he said:

State ownership and control is not necessarily Socialism - if it were, then the Army, the Navy, the Police, the Judges, the Gaolers, the Informers, and the Hangmen, all would all be Socialist functionaries, as they are State officials - but the ownership by the State of all the land and materials for labour, combined with the co-operative control by the workers of such land and materials, would be Socialism

Anarchists reject this out of hand, deeming it to be state socialism, but again this demonstrates their flawed understanding of such matters as the state and private property. One has to remember the Marxist approach of the overthrow of capitalism into socialism followed by the transition from socialism to fully-fledged communism. It is my belief that the anarchist requirment of a direct transition from a heavily stated society to an acepholous society is both philosophically and practically unreasonable.

Connolly’s understanding of the state and the workers’ republic was radically different than that of the Stalinist dictatorships that grew up following the Second World War. Rather he advocated for something called the co-operative commonwealth. In such a society the productive property is owned collectively and managed by democratic co-operatives, which are in turn organised along co-operative lines, industry-by-industry, region-by-region. This is very similar to the ideas put forward by Council Communism and true Jeffersonion democracy (something else I am researching), it is true social democracy, not the kind espoused by many ’social democratic’ political parties around the world. Simply put, he wanted a society that was democraticly run and organized for the benefit of society.

Connolly’s support of parliamentarianism and socialist parties puts him firmly at odds with anarchists and anarcho-syndicalists who try to claim him, but keeps himin the realm of Marxism and the revolutionary movements based on it.

Legacy:

His legacy in Ireland is mainly due to his contribution to the republican cause and his Marxism has been largely overlooked by mainstream histories. However, as was said before his legacy as a socialist has been claimed by a number of diverse groups including the Communist Party of Ireland, Connolly Youth Movement, éirígí, the IRSP, the Labour Party, Sinn Féin, the Socialist Party, the Socialist Workers Party, the Workers’ Party, the Scottish Socialist Party and a variety of other left-wing and left-republican groups. Also, despite claims to the contrary, Connolly’s writings show him to be first and foremost a Marxist thinker.

Connolly was among the few European members of the Second International who opposed, outright, World War I. This put him at odds with most of the labour leaders of Europe - but meant he was a co-thinker of those that would come to later call themselves communists, such as Lenin, Trotsky and Rosa Luxemburg. He was influenced by and heavily involved with the radical Industrial Workers of the World labour union and the theories of Daniel De Leon.

Also, despite their ideological and theoretical differences, Lenin was apparently a great admirer of Connolly, though it is likely the two never met. Lenin berated other communists, who had criticised the Easter Rebellion in Ireland as bourgeois. He maintained that no revolution was “pure”, and communists would have to unite with other disaffected groups in order to overthrow existing social orders. He was to prove his point the next year, during the Russian Revolution.

In Scotland, Connolly’s thinking was hugely influential to socialists such as John Maclean, who would similarly combine his leftist thinking with nationalist ideas when he formed his Scottish Workers Republican Party.

To return to the beginning, Connolly’s legacy has seen attempts to co-opt it by people of almost every political stripe in Ireland from anarchists, to nationalists to Stalinists. However, while Connolly was a lot of things, there were also a lot of things he was not. Chief among these he was not an anarchist, despite the claims of many anarchist thinkers and writers. If you do a quick Google search on James Connolly and anarchism you will find many sites calling Connolly, among other things an “anarchist union organizer.” However, as I hope I have shown, while he did side against the Marxist De Leon in the I.W.W. split in 1908, he never abandoned parlimentarianism or the idea of a socialist party, something that is the very antithesis of anarchism, especially anarcho-syndicalism. He was a committed Marxist and an revolutionary Irish nationalist, two other strains of thought that place him outside of anarchism. But in the end Connolly will always be remembered as someone who struggled for the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism and imperialism, and someone who gave his life for it. I finish with probably my two favourite Connolly quotes:

The great only appear great because we are on our knees, let us arise!

If you strike at, imprison, or kill us, out of our prisons or graves we will still evoke a spirit that will thwart you, and perhaps, raise a force that will destroy you! We defy you! Do your worst!

Taken from the weblog By Any Means Necessary
Edited by Larry

Sunday, 5 April 2009

Declaration of Arbroath


Although the English armies under Edward II were routed at Bannockburn in 1314 and by 1319, with the recapture of Berwick, effectively expelled from Scottish soil, they continued to mount attacks into Robert the Bruce's Scotland over the succeeding years.

The Pope had not accepted Scottish independence, perhaps partially because Robert the Bruce had been excommunicated for killing John Comyn in a church in Dumfries in 1306 (Comyn had formed an alliance with Edward, but perhaps had more of a right to be King than Bruce).

Thus the Declaration of Arbroath was prepared as a formal Declaration of Independence. It was drawn up in Arbroath Abbey on the 6th April 1320, most likely by the Abbot, Bernard de Linton, who was also the Chancellor of Scotland.

The Declaration urged the Pope to see things from a Scottish perspective and not to take the English claim on Scotland seriously. It used strong words, indicating that without acceptance of the Scottish case that the wars would continue and the resultant deaths would be the responsibility of the Pope.

The words of the "Declaration of Arbroath"

Thursday, 12 March 2009

The campaign for Scottish Freedom

Join the real Scottish Republican Socialists
To join Scotland's real republican socialists send an email to redlarry1962@googlemail.com and provide your real name, trade union organisation if any and political affiliation or belief.Also we need to know the town or city you live in. Or join our news and debate forum on.
http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/scotsocialistfreedom/

The Scottish Socialist Freedom Group is the only genuine republican socialist organisation in Scotland. Unlike others we have not sold out to the constitutionalist SNP and remain true to Scottish Republican Socialism by revolutionary means through political activity.

Our current aim is to recruit new members in Scotland committed to independence and socialism. We can meet up and formulate aims and our strategy over the coming months. Target areas remain Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee but will accept members to communicate whatever location or country they reside.

Don't get mad get even and join us today

www.ssfg.weebly.com

Wednesday, 11 March 2009

Re: Federal Republic of Scotland?

The Republican Socialist analysis in Ireland of Eire Nua's federalist advocacy (that is, the position of the IRSP, when this position was first advanced) was that it was a sop to the loyalist/unionist community of the six counties and was contrary to the realities of contemporary Irish society and potentially harmful to the nationalist communities of the six counties.

By advocating a four province, federal state, Sinn Fein seemed to think, the loyalists might perceive themselves as retaining significant influence within the province of Ulster, even were the province restored to its original nine county status, instead of the abbreviated six counties retained by Britain in order to gerrymander a loyalist majority. Insofar as the loyalists had since the creation of the six county statelet used their dominance to oppress and terrorize the nationalist population, advocacy of anything resembling a continuation of this situation could be called reckless at worst and ill-conceived at best.

While Scotland has experience of the sectarian 'orange and green' divide, it is one that immigated to Scotland along with the Scotish populace formerly resident in Ireland and lacks the geographic concentrations that exist in Ireland. Were there a sectarian community resident in the highlands or islands hostile to the populace of the central belt, for example, one might be able to see why such a proposal was being advanced, but the reality is that to the extent a sectarian divide exists within the Scottish populace, both sides of that sectarian divide are more likely to be found in Glasgow than in any hinterlands of the nation.

An argument could be advanced that the divide between the speakers of Lallans and the speakers of Scot's Gaelig (essentially a lowlands/highlands divide) or the division between the pockets of Scottish Catholicism and the Kirk (essentially a division between small pockets in the islands and the mainland of Scotland) could provide a basis for some form of federalism. However, in the latter instance, there are probably far more Catholics in Glasgow than in the rest of Scotland combined and, in regard to the former, the extent to which the gaelig-speaking communities remaining in Scotland provide a viable base for federal division is clearly open to debate.

When one considers the significant difference that still exist between the highlands and islands and the lowlands, a strong case could be made that the populace of the highlands and islands might benefit from some constitutional protections being erected to secure their interests from being trampled upon by the far larger populace of the central belt and southern lowlands, but this doesn't necessitate the move to federalism to ensure. Scots should bear these legitimate concerns of those living in the highlands and islands when drafting a constitution after winning an independent Scottish workers' republic, however--even within a workers' republic the cultural, geographic, and historic differences between Scotland's highland and lowland populace argue for safeguards that will protect those characteristics most desirable, without preserving the reactionary attributes that have sometimes accompanied them.

More important than consideration of whether or not to adopt a federal approach to Scottish independence is consideration of the class orientation followed towards Scottish independence. Scottish independence must reflect a genuine national liberation for it to have meaning for the masses of the Scottish people and in contemporary times real national liberation is impossible without breaking the fetters of imperialism and globalized capitalism that undermine the national sovereignty of all peoples. For Scottish workers to remain oppressed by foreign imperialists and native capitalists in an independent Scotland is to have won nothing worth having. The imperative of Scottish national liberation is rooted in the reality that it is only through the break up of the archaic British state that the working class of all the nations of the islands or Britain and Ireland will be able to win their liberation as workers and as human beings. That said, the Scottish working class would be fool-hardy to support any two-stage argument that calls upon them to support the creation of an independent capitalist Scotland as an intermediate step towards building socialism.

The central tenet of the republican socialist tendency, that the struggles for national liberation and socialism are inseparablly intertwined remains as true today as it did in the time of James Connolly or John MacLean. The majority of Scotland's people are workers and those Scottish workers must insist that the creation of an independent Scottish republic is also the creation of a workers' republic.

Peter Urban
International Republican Socialist Network

Saturday, 7 March 2009

Federal Republic of Scotland?

I have received an email about a Federal Republic of Scotland and the position of Scottish republicans. I am not an expert on federalism so could only give a general reply.

Hi, I wanted to ask a question regarding your movement. Is a "Federal Republic of Scotland" being advocated for or against by the Scottish republican movement, and what is the opinion of the Scottish republicans regarding intra-Scotland federalism?

I wanted to ask this because this was put forth by Irish republicans as part of an "Éire Nua" proposal ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89ire_Nua ), although the Éire Nua is controversial among Northern Irish republicans like Sinn Fein because of its concessions to Northern Irish protestants (who desire no less than a pronounced degree of autonomy, preferably, in protestant eyes, under a Protestant ruler than a Catholic one) in a United Ireland; outside of the republican movement, a federal republic of Ireland has also been proposed for pragmatic, local reasons, including the geopolitical distance between the services of the government in Dublin and the needs of local governments in other areas.

My supposition is that a federal republic of Scotland would address concerns regarding social self-governance at the local and regional levels better than a unitary, Glasgow-centric republic would post-independence. Furthermore, it would give greater political flexibility to local areas of Scotland in the same way that devolution and further future liberalizations of Westminster's hold over Scotland have for the political and economic viability of the country.

So, what is the opinion of the Scottish republican movement regarding a "Federal Republic of Scotland?"

Rayne
USA


And my reply:

Hi

The concept of federalism has never been debated by Scottish Republicans or Scottish Republican Socialists that I am aware of.

The Eire Nua model as advocated by Republican Sinn Fein and dropped by Gerry and his Provos is probably one of the most workable constitutional arrangements for a United Ireland. This is because the island is made up of 4 provinces one of which Ulster remains in the chains and bondage of British imperialism. I have a lot of respect for RSF's Eire Nua programme.

In Scotland the regions are different so where would we place the devolved parliaments? Or should our regions eg: Highland's & islands, Strathclyde, Tayside etc..become federal states within an independent Scotland?

You raise interesting questions on federalism of which I am not an expert on these matters.

As for a unitary state as an independent Scotland the parliament is likely to be situated in Edinburgh and yes it would be true to say Scotland is no different than any other country that the regions have specific issues and problems where a federal solution within independence could be an interesting programme to implement.

What we do not support is preservation of the union with Britain so would not be happy to settle with a Federal state within the UK.

Saying all this the pressing matters for republicans in Scotland has been the independence arguments and the need for a referendum to settle the matter for time being.

It would be interesting to debate the merits of federalism within an independent Scotland if I knew what forum would debate this I would be glad to hear about it. So far the independence movement have not been known to debate the merits of federalism within an independent Scotland.

Slainte
LM

A blog with a distinctly Scottish theme covering my interests in matters Scottish and Republican Socialism.