Ireland: Easter 1916-2012

At Easter every year in every parish
in Ireland and in many places around the world Irish Republicans gather
to pay homage to those men and women who died in the struggle for
independence. This year, 2012, will be no different. However, whereas 50
years ago there was only one Republican Movement, today there are at
least seven different republican traditions that have emerged out of the
northern struggle.

All
will march separately to graveyards to pay their respects to the dead
and articulate their message as to why people should follow their
particular form of Irish Republicanism. Some will make class appeals.
Others will make nationalist appeals, while others will argue that their
way is the “only show in town” and that the full implementation of all
the outgoings of the Good Friday Agreement will achieve national
independence. So called ‘dissidents’ will vehemently disagree with that
latter argument and some of them will maintain that the only road ahead
is that of armed struggle.

All, however, base themselves on the proclamation of Easter 1916 in particular which said:

“We declare the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of
Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish 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 except by the destruction of the Irish people. In
every generation the Irish people have asserted their right to national
freedom and sovereignty: six times during the past three hundred years
they have asserted it in arms. Standing on that fundamental right and
again asserting it in the face of the world, we hereby proclaim the
Irish Republic as a Sovereign Independent State, and we pledge our lives
and the lives of our comrades-in-arms to the cause of its freedom, of
its welfare, and its exaltation among the nations.” ¹

The Easter proclamation is a powerful and moving document, 96 years
old, yet still capable of inspiring young people to take up arms in
pursuit of the goal of an independent Republic. In its time it was, and
still is, a progressive document, advocating universal suffrage, equal
rights for all and a republican form of government.

Sadly over the years the goals of the document have been partially
forgotten and the means have become dominant. Indeed not only did the
means become dominant but then the ‘movement’ to achieve those goals
became dominant and in the end the ‘movement’ was all and neither the
goals nor the means matter. Loyalty to the movement became the
overriding consideration.

In modern politics as expressed by the parties of the ruling class,
this is known as control-freakery and spin doctoring. Dissent is not
tolerated and loyalty to the ruling clique/or leader is paramount. Those
who question are demonised, accused of stealing, drug-taking,
drunkenness or even of being ‘intellectuals’.

They are ‘touts’ or agents of a foreign power or whatever it takes to
isolate, undermine, and reduce the influence of those who question.
Ideas are not challenged, but personalities are attacked and slandered.

Such tactics naturally provoke a response, but within Irish
Republicanism that response has been generally negative. Rather than
establish a clearly defined goal and outlining the steps to reach such
goals, dissenting Republicans tend to attack the leaderships of the
dominant provisional republican movement.

Some, sadly, have become obsessed with that body and never miss an opportunity to verbally attack PSF. Negativity rarely works.

Since 1994 this writer has argued that republicanism has suffered a
major defeat. That is ever more so today with the failure of fellow
republicans to co-operate even on the most basic of things like support
for political prisoners like Marian Price and others. Initiatives in the
past to bring Republicans into a common forum have broken down because
some feared contamination by mixing with those Republicans who support
armed struggle. Rather than begin a process of persuasion by example,
argument and debate, people retreated into their own safe little
republican sects. That is part of the reason there are now so many
different republican traditions. (If that process keeps up there soon
may be as many republican sects as there are Trotskyist/Stalinist/Maoist
tendencies!!!!)

In relation to aspects of armed struggle there is an argument to be
made. Unfortunately, that argument is not being made or articulated. It
is as if the deed itself speaks and is the only argument. The Red Plough
is opposed to armed struggle at this time in Irish history. This is not
1916, nor indeed the early 20’s or the 50’s or the 70’s or 80’s. Time,
conditions, people and economies have moved on and changed. Technology
has in the past twenty years transformed the way we live our lives.

We have argued consistently that the only road is the political road ². Politics by ideas and deed is the way forward.

A respected veteran Republican, Jim Lane has argued that Irish
republicanism as articulated by Wolfe Tone in the 18th century was the
most progressive ideology of its day. That the republican socialism as
argued by James Connolly ³
in the early part of the 20th century was the most progressive though
of the day; that the ideas of Karl Marx were the most progressive ideas
of this time. We concur.

That is why we argue that for republicanism to win the mass of the
Irish people to its ideas and thoughts it must embrace the radical and
progressive ideas of socialism. It is true that most, if not all, the
differing republican traditions pay some form of homage towards
socialism. But that is more in word than in deed. At the heart of the
ideas of socialism is the working class. Class struggle is the motive
force of history. Speaking about the Easter rising, Lenin, who knew a
little bit about revolution, wrote:

“Whoever calls such an uprising a ‘putsch’ is either a hardened
reactionary or a doctrinaire hopelessly incapable of picturing a social
revolution as a living thing.” ⁴
“For to imagine that social revolution is conceivable without revolts
by small nations in the colonies and in Europe, without the
revolutionary outbursts of a section of the petty bourgeoisie with all
its prejudices, without a movement of politically non-conscious
proletarian and semi-proletarian masses against landlord, church,
monarchical, national and other oppression – to imagine that means
repudiating social revolution. Very likely one army will line up in one
place and say, ‘We are for socialism’, while another will do so in
another place and say, ‘We are for imperialism’, and that will be the
social revolution! Only from such a ridiculously pedantic angle could
one label the Irish rebellion a ‘putsch’.
“Whoever expects a ‘pure’ social revolution will never live to see
it. Such a person pays lip service to revolution without understanding
what revolution really is.” ⁵

The class struggle is not simply a clear class battle between workers
and capitalism lined up in opposition. It is a living thing existing
day by day and taking many shapes and forms. The 1916 Rising was part of
the class struggle because the struggle for national self-determination
is so interwoven with the class struggle that in Connolly’s words:

“The cause of labour is the cause of Ireland. The cause of Ireland is the cause of labour. They cannot be dissevered…” ⁶

Much has been written about how the people of Dublin booed and
heckled the prisoners as they were marched through the streets of
Dublin. Yet even here the class struggle breaks through:

“I have read many accounts of public feeling in Dublin in these days.
They all agreed that the open and strong sympathy of the mass of the
population was with the British troops. That this was so in the better
parts of the city, I have no doubt but certainly what I myself saw in
the poorer districts did not confirm this. It rather indicated that
there was a vast amount of sympathy with the rebels particularly after
the rebels were defeated. The sentences of the Court Martial deepened
this sympathy.” ⁷

Today that class struggle is going on all over Ireland. It is in the
struggle over the property tax on households, in the worker occupations
of buildings closed by the politics of Austerity, in the struggles to
defend the public services from privatisation and in the prison
struggles. These and many more struggles are interconnected. Of course,
there will be some sects on the left who deny this and demonise those
who come from a wholly republican background. But that is no excuse for
republicans themselves to walk away from these issues. The struggle is
all embracing. James Connolly did not take part in the uprising for a
‘free Ireland’. He was very clear:

"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… but the Irish working class.”

That was central to his thinking. Connolly did not take part as some
kind of so called “blood sacrifice” – an idea put about by reactionary
elements to undermine the class nature of Connolly’s participation in
the 1916 Rising. Rather it was to spark the working class into action.
No one today accuses the USA’s Thomas Jefferson of being bloodthirsty
because he wrote: “The tree of liberty must continually be watered with
the blood of martyrs and tyrants” ⁸

War is by its nature ugly. It destroys. It destroys men women and
children. It destroys buildings and wrecks economies. War leaves barren
devastation not only on the land but in the hearts and minds of people.
There is no romance or glory in war.

Today the greatest terrorists are the Imperialists and their lackeys.
Since the Second World War US armed forces have been in continuous
action in suppressing uprisings, left-wing regimes, and controlling oil
and natural resources for the benefit of US capitalists. The so called
‘terrorist’ actions of a few Irish Republicans pale into insignificance
when compared to the continuous crimes of Imperialism. Nevertheless
Irish Republicans have always been demonised. It goes with the
territory! Some argue that this is because of the threat that armed
actions pose to Imperialism.

There is, however, a counter-argument to that which says that British
Imperialism welcomes armed struggle from Irish republicans. It helps
sharpen their intelligence services and training and also because they
know it can never attain its goal without the overwhelming consent of
the Irish people. What they do fear is the spread of republican and
progressive ideas among the mass of the population, catholic and
protestant Irish and British.

And there are great opportunities to do just that. The political
cement that has held Western capitalism together since the Second World
War is crumbling. In the current world crisis of capitalism there are
few crumbs our masters can throw to the masses. Rather they need to
exploit every last bit of labour they can for the cheapest price. It is
the working classes who are paying the price for the collapse of the
system.

Austerity faces the working classes for the next generation. However,
that has a political price and it is the increasing disillusionment of
the working classes with the political parties who push austerity. The
demise of Fianna Fail and the rise of both independents and provisional
Sinn Fein in the south of Ireland is a clear example of that. Both
Labour Parties in Britain and Ireland are committed to austerity. Hence,
the shock to the British Labour Party when George Galloway romped home
in the Bradford West By-election. It was here that the local Labour
controlled council pushed through £67 million in cuts, axing over a
thousand jobs. No wonder there is growing disenchantment with these so
called progressive parties.

In the North of Ireland the power sharing executive presides over the
collapse of the national health services and the cutting of the public
sector. Unemployment is growing particularly among the youth and more
and more businesses are going bankrupt.

There has never been a better time in Ireland to work towards the
unification of the left and progressive forces and work towards building
a revolutionary alternative. Of course it will not be easy but it would
be good if at least republicans articulated a desire to see such a
coming together. It would be good to hear from the differing republican
traditions this Easter in statements to the effect that they were
prepared to cooperate with others and work towards building a broad
front that could work on both the class and national questions.

After all, both the Easter Proclamation and the Easter Rising were
the products of a coming together of the forces of socialism and
republicanism. Is it too much to hope that this Easter a small beginning
could be made by Irish Republicans?

Footnotes

1. The Easter Proclamation
2. The Political Road
3. See John Hoffman’s “James Connolly and the theory of Historical Materialism”, Saothar 2, for an interesting take on James Connolly.
4. Lenin’s article on the rising appears in O Dudley Edwards and F Pyle (eds), 1916: the Easter Rising, Dublin 1968, pp192-9
5. The quote is taken from pp192-9 3. 5 Dudley Edwards and Pyle, p193
6. Great Republican Quotes
7. “1916 as History “ C Desmond Greaves -Fulcrum press 1991 p. 42
8. “1916 as History “ C Desmond Greaves -Fulcrum press 1991 p. 42