James Connolly contrasted socialism to the shenanigans of nationalist politics in articles published for the first time since his execution in Issue 18 (March 2004).
Home Thrusts
[The Workers’ Republic, October 7 1899]
The middle class nationalist.
He is a queer animal.
It is safe to say that nowhere in the political world, whether it be Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, or Cork Hill,1 can you find a species of the GENUS HOMO so curiously compounded of contradictory opinions and blind worship of meaningless phraseology as the middle class nationalist.
The home-manufactured brand, I mean.
Let me, before I go too far over the front page, draw your attention to that proof of my wide reading and profound erudition—my easy and classical handling of the phrase:
GENUS HOMO.
’Tis a Latin phrase. I’m great on Latin—when I don’t mislay my Latin quotation book.
Of course, the average reader doesn’t understand Latin, but that need not trouble us; the average listener at a political gathering of Home Rulers doesn’t understand one half of what is said but does that destroy his admiration for the politicians?
Not a destroy! On the contrary, the less he understands, the more he admires.
If he understood more he would admire less.
You know how our fathers thronged to the meetings of O’Connell and his successors in the gentle art of the political huckster, and how they cheered and applauded till the hills shook again, then how they trudged home to their wretched cabins, saying to one another:
“Sure, isn’t the Counsellor a great man, entirely; an’ isn’t it he that has the larnin’? Sorra one o’ me could understand the one half of what he said, at all, at all.”
And you know that when O’Connell was in Connaught, where five sixths of the people of his time spoke Irish and Irish only, O’Connell always spoke to them in the English.
He, of course, understood Irish as well as they did, but being a good and great Irish capitalist-landlord-patriot he preferred the tongue of the “brutal Saxon”.
Therefore it is permissible for a humble scribe like Spailpín to follow such illustrious examples and use words not understanded by the common multitude.
“The use of words is to conceal ideas.”2
“Words are the counters of wise men, the money of fools.”3
A proper study of the philosophy hidden in these two quotations will enable you to appreciate the inner meaning of political oratory.
Let us now return to our subject—the middle-class nationalist.
The nationalism of men who desire to retain the present social system is not the fruit of a natural growth, but an ugly abortion, the abortive product of an attempt to create a rebellious movement in favour of political freedom among men contented to remain industrial slaves.
It is an attempt to create a revolutionary movement towards freedom and to entrust the conduct of that movement to a class desirous of enforcing the social subjection of the men they are professing to lead.
It professes to believe that the class grinding us down to industrial slavery can at the same moment be leading us forward to national liberty.
In its baser aspects, as exemplified in the life and language of the Home Rule politicians, it is simply a desire to have the administration of English law vested in the hands of Irishmen.
The fight over the hoisting of a green flag over the Courthouse at Mullingar was a striking illustration of what is meant by middle class nationalism.
The courthouse is where British Law is administered, the flag floating over it was, and rightly, an English one—the emblem of British capitalist robbery; the middle class nationalists stirred up the people to tear down the flag and hoist a green one in its place, and when the feat was achieved hailed it as a presage of their future triumph.
More than a whole volume of arguments this illustrates the political ideal of the capitalist patriot:
British Law administered under an Irish flag. Lo! Ireland would be free.
All other things unchanged; overwork, underpay, evictions, poverty, hunger, and social tyranny might flourish in our midst, but as long as a green flag floated above the victims, Ireland was free.
Such is middle class nationalism.
And such is non-Socialist patriotism.
Mr Field MP provides us with another illustration.
He was invited to the great anti-war meeting held in Dublin on Sunday last,4 and writing a letter expressing his sympathy, and regretting his inability to attend, he, in all seriousness I presume, stated that Ireland could not help sympathising with the Boers in their fight against an alien government, because
“Ireland had suffered, and was suffering, from ALIEN METHODS of depopulation and overtaxation.”
Note that phrase, well. It would lead you to believe that Mr Field did not object to depopulation and overtaxation as being intrinsically bad of themselves; what he did object to, according to the letter, were the “alien methods” of applying them.
He wanted the oppression and robbery to be of Irish manufacture.
It reminds me of the great outcry made by the Dublin papers on Horse Show week about the number of English pickpockets invading the city.
There was something pathetic in the manner our journalists dwelt upon the fact that the pickpockets were English.
You would imagine that picking pockets was an important Irish industry, and that our journalistic friends were patriotically desirous of saving this industry from the ruinous effects of English competition.
Mr Field’s phrase was, perhaps, only a slip, but it was symptomatic of the trend of thought peculiar to the class to which he belongs.
It is said that anatomical science has advanced to such perfection that a modern anatomist can, from a study of a single bone of any animal, deduce the whole structure of that animal.
In like manner can the scientific Socialist, from a study of such phrases as those of Mr Field, and such acts as those at Mullingar, reconstruct and expose to public view the whole political philosophy of the Irish master class, no matter how artfully they strive to conceal it.
I was glad to see such a magnificent turn out to the anti-war demonstration organised by Miss Gonne. It is not the least exaggeration to describe it as the largest held in Dublin during this generation.
It is a good thing for the nationalists of Dublin that there is one woman able to shame their leaders into acting like men.
Spailpín
Parnellism and Democracy
[The Workers’ Republic, October 7 1899]
On Sunday next, October 8th, the streets of Dublin will be the scene of another of those political “walks” or processions for which our people are so famous, the occasion this time being the Parnell Demonstration.5 It is hard to tell what particular good to any particular party is to be achieved by processions of this character. We see a huge rush of people up from every part of the country, a great turn-out of the inhabitants of the city, a procession of bands and banners, some speechmaking by a number of gentlemen who have said all they have to say so often that they could not by any possibility say anything novel or interesting, and the grand event is over; everybody will go home, and things will go on just the same as if the demonstrators had never demonstrated. As an opportunity for our hardworked people to obtain a more or less pleasant outing the demonstration may have its uses, but as a means of earnest political warfare, or even of disseminating enlightenment on the great problems of the day, it is entirely valueless.
Dropping, however, this harshly practical view of the case, let us examine this phenomenon in relation to the political philosophy of the parties indulging in it. We note first that such demonstrations as the Parnell demonstration are indicative of the belief of its promoters that great political principles can never move the masses unless such principles are symbolised in the personality of a great leader. This is, in our belief, one of the great flaws in the teachings to which the Irish people have become accustomed by our middle class agitators. One result of this theory has been the total suppression of intelligent discussion and free expression of opinion at all Irish gatherings, and the substitution of cut and dried resolutions, by carefully selected speakers whose word it was rank heresy to question, for thoughtful consideration by all interested, and the growth of a hero-worship which always ended by overshadowing alike the party and its principles. Thus we have had the O’Connellites, Mitchellites, Duffyites, Sadlierites, Stephenites, Buttites, and Parnellites;6 always and ever the name of the man occupying the place of the principles. Though not recognised as a danger, yet danger it always remains; when the name of a leader usurps the place of a principle the movement he leads is deprived of its broad base in the soil of justice, and is compelled instead to place all its reliance upon the personal integrity and clear-sightedness of one frail mortal. The result can not be but disastrous at any time; based upon a principle, and among a people accustomed to disregard the personality of leaders and look only to the inherent justice of their cause, the treachery or weakness of leaders matters little; among a people accustomed to bank their hopes upon an individual leader, as the nationalists of Ireland have ever done, the moral standing of an individual has frequently ruined the hopes of an entire trusting nation.
Our Home Rule friends do not see this fact, or else, seeing it, they prefer it with all its dangers, to the intelligent awakening of the democracy to the need of earnest discussion of fundamental principles and the subordination of their representatives to the will of the people they represent. Thus the worship of Parnell is kept up, thus the name of Redmond7 is made as far as possible the synonym to-day of all that the name of Parnell once stood for—the pigmy assumes the swagger of the giant—thus the people are encouraged to trust to leadership and abandon the only hope of success, their own initiative.
The Socialist Republican Party on the other hand pursues a policy the very antithesis of all this. They have no permanent president or chairman, thus avoiding the danger of bossism and the perpetual intrigues for positions which disgrace every other party: they recognise no person as leader, the most prominent speaker or writer has no more sway in the organisation than the most silent worker; they allow no party manifesto or leaflet to be signed by an individual, thus no member can obtrude his personality upon the party; they insist upon a regular system of book-keeping and a weekly statement and quarterly audit of all monies received and expended, thus giving every man a full knowledge of the party’s actions; and finally they transact all business at weekly meetings in which every member is invited to take part.
A party built up on such lines has no need of leaders—nor yet has it any fear of them: aiming at a system of society which will be the embodiment of the principle of the fullest democracy alike in politics and industry, the legislature and the workshop, it seeks to march towards its goal by disciplining its members to the practice of the fullest democracy here and now as a preparation for the more perfect civilisation of the future.
Between those opposing parties, the Parnellite and capitalist Home Rule parties of all shades and hues, who, supporting a social order founded upon mastership and subjection, retain mastership and subjection in their political organisations, and the Socialist Republican Party, which, seeking the free social order of self-respecting democracy, embodies its ideal in its present political organisation, you, reader, have to choose.
Home Thrusts
[The Workers’ Republic, October 21 1899]
The Parnell Demonstration.
And the Dublin “news”-papers’ comments thereon.
They were great value.
Poor Lord Mayor Tallon was hissed, hooted and booed whenever he showed his face, he was made a mark for various kinds of missiles, he was shouted down whenever he attempted to make his voice heard, and he was responsible for provoking such an outburst of hostility as completely wiped out any significance which might have centred round the ceremony over which he was supposed to preside.
The laying of the foundation stone to the Parnell monument which was intended to instil new life into the Redmondite Party, has, instead, been the means of still further covering it with contempt.
The foundation stone might fittingly be inscribed with an epitaph—the epitaph of Redmondism in Dublin. As follows:—
Here lieth Redmondism, which departed this life and was buried at the crossroads of O’Connell Street, Great Britain Street, and Rutland Square on October 8th, 1899. RIP.
Before leaving the subject of the funeral, no I mean the demonstration, I would recall to the minds of our readers the accounts of it given in the Dublin papers.
When we are reading a newspaper we, as all sensible men should, make allowance for the different mental standpoints of the writers whose articles we are reading.
Thus we expect from a loyalist a different conception of Irish politics from that we would expect from a nationalist; from a Catholic different opinions on religion to what we would expect from a Protestant, and so on through all the various questions upon which men differ.
We expect different versions, and do not dream of attributing such different versions to the dishonesty of the writer.
But, when it comes to recording a piece of news, to recounting an incident where a knowledge of the facts recorded is not dependent upon political leanings but upon the accuracy and clearness of the bodily eye, then to read two entirely contradictory statements of what took place is calculated to make even the prejudiced man in the street admit that the Socialists are very near the mark when they talk of “the prostitute capitalist press.”
Thus the Dublin papers of Monday 9th October, all of whose reporters sat together on the same platform, and witnessed the same scenes throughout the city, give entirely different versions of the events of the day.
The Freeman speaks of the smallness of the procession, the Independent describes it as magnificent in size; the Freeman tells in flaring headlines of extraordinary demonstrations of hostility, the Independent enthuses over the orderly and enthusiastic gathering; the Freeman declares that nobody heard the speeches, the Independent asserts that they were received with applause; the Freeman reports verbatim the resolutions “which were supposed to be put” to the meeting, the Independent reports the resolutions as carried.
Thus the war of newspapers is carried on. Lies, falsifications, suppressions of truth and suggestions of falsehood are indulged in in a wholesale manner on both sides, and yet in spite of such brazen and palpable trickery you will meet presumably sane men who will tell you that:
“It must be true. Didn’t I read it in the papers?”
It is said that misfortune makes strange bedfellows, but so does prosperity.
The fact must have occurred to the mind of any one of his friends who
observed L C Strange, Mayor of Waterford, in the same carriage with Lord Mayor Tallon of Dublin.
Laurence Strange was at one time a Socialist, and was instrumental in forming a branch of the English Independent Labour Party in the city of Waterford.
At that time he would not have dreamt of shaking hands with a corrupt and ignorant bourgeois like the present Lord Mayor of Dublin, nor would he have associated publicly with a man who proclaimed himself as loyal to the rule of the pirate Empire of England.
But now he is Mayor of Waterford, elected by the citizens, and, in consequence, it would require a very powerful telescope to discover where his Socialism has gone to.
And on Sunday, as he sat in the Mayoral chair and passed through all the storm of popular hostility directed against Tallon of Dublin, many of his oldtime friends, recognising him, pitied him, saying:
’Tis Strange, ’tis passing strange.
But I don’t blame L C Strange for his presnt position. It strikes me as only another case of a man’s class interests proving too strong for his intellectual perceptions.
The class interests of a worker enable him without difficulty to remain clearsighted and uncompromising; the class interests of the middle and upper class “friends” of Socialism are ever tending to warp and distort their vision, alike on principles and methods.
Therefore, be cautious in trusting even our friends in the master class.
Remember, “the emancipation of the working class must be the act of the working class itself.”8
That is the guiding principle of Modern Scientific Socialism.
In other words, oh ye workers, accept help from every direction, but trust only in yourselves.
I don’t usually read the Irish Times, but I did last week and was rewarded by discovering this gem in a letter sent to that paper and published on Wednesday, October 11th.
The letter is signed by “Coleman Flaherty, late 94th Connaught Rangers,” and contains a quotation from a letter sent by his brother-in-law in South Africa.
I reproduce a part of this letter, in order to give it the benefit of our extended circulation.
After denouncing the Irishmen who have joined the Boers (as the Socialist anti-war meeting in College Green advised them to do),9 he goes on as follows:
Up Catholic Irishmen, up Catholic soldiers, who can be Catholic “hirelings” but never “jumpers.” Down with Davitt and the Dutch, and the District Councils, who hate the Catholic soldiers and love the “jumpers” who may be Boers, but no soldiers. Come on, Connaught Rangers. One God, one country, your own. Connaught aboo, and Catholic Ireland. God save Ireland.
There’s a peroration for you! What does it mean, anyway?
I propose to offer a prize for the solution of the problem presented by this letter.
To whoever can translate, decipher, comprehend, make clear, elucidate, explain, and render into readable English the quotation given, I will present the first Jubilee medal with his name on it I find floating down the Liffey on a grindstone.
In passing I must notice that this “Western Gael,” as he calls himself in another part of the letter, spells the Irish word “ABÚ” in the vulgar English fashion “ABOO” which gives me reason to doubt whether he hails from anything farther west than Westmoreland Street.
The offices of the Irish Times.
Spailpín
Notes
- Location of City Hall, where Dublin Corporation holds its meetings.
- Probably a reference to Voltaire’s aphorism: “Men use thought only to justify their wrongdoings, and speech only to conceal their thoughts.”
- “Words are wise men’s counters, they do but reckon with them, but they are the money of fools”—Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan.
- A demonstration, organised primarily by Maud Gonne, against the Boer War which had just broken out.
- The demonstration was to mark the laying of the foundation stone for the monument to Charles Stewart Parnell at the top of O’Connell Street.
- Various factions of nationalist politicians, followers respectively of Daniel O’Connell, John Mitchel, Charles Gavan Duffy, John Sadlier, James Stephens, Isaac Butt, and Parnell.
- John Redmond was the leader of the Parnellite faction, and was aiming to become leader of a reunited nationalist party.
- A quotation from the rules of the International Working Men’s Association, written by Karl Marx.
- The Irish Socialist Republican Party organised a meeting on 27 August which denounced the British aggression, supported the Boers, and called on Irishmen in South Africa to fight alongside them. See Connolly, Collected Works, Volume Two (New Books 1988), p 30.
RED BANNER 