“especially because failure to do so would present tremendous…”

especially , because failure to do so would present a tremendous barrier to the emancipation of the British working class itself.

This internationalist stand of the early communists was on the wane however by the beginning of the 20th century and almost completely scuttled by the outbreak of the First World War when socialist parties in the combatant countries lined up behind their national ruling classes. Connolly along with the Russian revolutionaries Lenin and Trotsky, was amongst the minority of socialists who opposed the war and held firmly to the principle of international workers’ solidarity. SOCIAL REVOLUTION Therefore, when Connolly went into the G.P.O. that Easter Monday he knew that he would get little support from socialists elsewhere. Those who were enthusiastically defending the right of their ‘own nation’ to knock the living daylights out of the workers of other countries would have little sympathy for any fight on behalf of Irish freedom. Indeed, Lenin and Trotsky were almost alone in defending the right of Irish workers to take up arms against imperial Britain Arguing against those who termed the Easter Risifig “A putsch” and “‘a skirmish”, Lenin wrote:

“To imagine that social revolution is conceivable without revolts by small nations in the colonies and in Europe --. to imagine this means repudiating Social revolution.” (emphasis in original)

Lenin and Trotsky had no difficulty in grasping the connection between the Irish revolt and the international Joe Sherlock, Sinn Fein the Workers Party TD, described the Coalition budget as “‘a savage attack on the working man’”’. Sound reason, therefore to vote against it. But no, Sherlock abstained. His explanation? He was afraid he might bring down Garret FitzGerald’s government! Sinn Fein the Workers Party is fearful of another general election. They know that Sherlock won his seat by a fluke — the absence of a genuine anti-imperialist alternative. In any new contest it is a certainty that he will be opposed by a real Republican Socialist candidate. So to hang on to the “spoils of office” the SFWP prefer to let a “savage attack” pass unimpeded through Leinster House.

SFWP POLITICS Sherlock’s pitiful performance however is not just the usual short-sighted opportunism of the “Parish pump” politician. His cowardice flows from the very logic of the SFWP’s programme. The essence of this programme is a denial of the relevance of the national question.

In 1977 the SFWP published its programme in detail. ‘The Irish Industrial Revolution’, as it was called, argued that the economic underdevelopment and political oppression of Ireland was not caused by British imperialist domination. Rather it was caused by a species named the “Irish bourgeoisie’’. This class was a lazy, degenerate lot who never did anything productive and squandered their capital On useless luxuries and the like. Eventually they found themselves with a stagnant economy and had to call in “American monopoly capitalism’’. US. big business proved to be the saviour of the Irish economy ... and of the Irish working class.

THE REALITY OF BRITISH DOMINATION Most of this analysis is pure fantasy. From the beginning the Irish capitalist class existed to serve the interests of British imperialism. They supplied the British market with cheap raw agricultural products, food profits, not to reinvest in production, but to provide a source of ready cash this British imposed neo-colonial system became chaotically stagnant Britain decided that its own interests would be best served by sharing the burden — and the spoils — with European and American imperialism.

American big business did not arrive in Ireland as a liberator but as a neocolonial exploiter in partnership with Britain. It is true that in terms of investment sponsored by the Industrial Development Authority, US. multinationals are the biggest and most dynamic contributors. But at least a third of this investment is undertaken in conjunction with the British dominated banks. Moreover British capital still controls the Irish sector (which in Ireland is probably more important than the stockexchange, including in its ranks such firms as Guinnesses). On top of this about a quarter of new mulii-national invesiment is owned by Britisi: companies. and drink. In addition they used their for British financial institutions. When Range and the private company or building socialism. REFORMISM The truth is that the recent phase of capitalist development in Ireland occurred essentially within the framework of Britain’s imperialist hold. Of course, just as there are tensions between big-farmer capitalists and industrialists there are also tensions between the native, British and international capitalists. But they always sink these differences in face of the common enemy — the Irish working class and its small farmer allies. Above all, American imperialism supports and encourages British policy in Ireland.

Since the SFWP have junked the concept of British imperialist domination and replaced by the fantasy of antagonism between the “Irish bourgeoisie” and “American monopoly capitalism” it is not strange to find that they have a warped idea of what “‘class struggle” is all about. Because the “Irish bourgeoisie”’, so the argument goes, have held back economic progress, they must be pushed aside. At this point in time only “progressive” multinationals are capable of doing this. So Irish workers must help to establish the victory of U.S. big business. When a healthy capitalism SFWP. has been created by this route them a sound basis for building socialism will exist. But not till then can there be any talk of abolishing capitalism It is in the context of this “strategy” that the capitulation of Sherlock and the SFWP to the Fine Gael coalition can be understood. The SFWP categorically disavows the revolutionary ATTACK’

Republican Socialism of Connolly. The party programme of SFWP openly states: “We want the capitalist system to feed, clothe and shelter the working class to the utmost degree even under the present system”. And the document proudly adds: “We intend to fight the next general election on the basis of a short term plan which we unashamedly describe as a reformist plan and we intend in Dail Eireann to implement that plan...”

Now where did you hear that before?! You guessed it, from the Irish Labour Party. And where is the Irish Labour Party today? Right again — in Coalition with Garret FitzGerald and the other staunch defenders of capitalism. And it is clear that after only a few brief weeks in Leinster House Mr Sherlock & Co are heading in the same direction. Unfortunately for the SFWP there is room for only one reformist Labour Party in Irish politics. They will probably have to try to hang on to their usurped “Republican” credentials if they are to retain any kind of mass support. But fewer and fewer people are fooled by this manoeuvre. The dustbin of history awaits the Throughout the sad history of the SFWP there is at least one lesson socialists can learn. It is that you cannot abandon the national struggle without abandoning the class struggle. As Connolly said: “The cause of Ireland is the cause of Labour. The cause of Labour is the cause of Ireland”.

His words could not be more relevant.

On 12 August 1969; after a year of blocking and batoning Civil Rights marches throughout the North of Ireland, the Royal Ulster Constabulary escorted an Apprentice Boys parade celebrating 300 years of sectarian tyranny through the centre of Derry. The result was the Battle of Bogside, with half the RUC trying to smash their way into the Derry ghetto to take their revenge on the Croppies who had refused to lie down. On 13 August the two Peoples Democracy members on the executive of “the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association took the lead in getting NICRA to call a series of simultaneous demonstrations in solidarity with the people of Derry. The determination of the Bogside defenders and then the other protests — the riots — were too much for the RUC. At that time it was only 3,000strong (today it has 8,000 members) occupation has been unable to defeat. Ss PAT TLE OF THE FALLS Once more the barricades have gone up in the streets of Belfast and Derry. Once more thousands demonstrated the unquenchable spirit of resistance which twelve years of British military MICHAEL FARRELL here recalls what it was like in August 1969 and tells the inside story of how the Catholic ghettos of Belfast barricaded themselves off for a month, keeping out both the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army.

Ays! — * discuss policy. N o-one behind the barricades, not even PD, demanded the immediate withdrawal of the British troops — though we at least warned that when their masters ordered it their guns would be turned on the ghettoes, as they were a year later in the Battle of the Falls, July 1970. But those were the days when women gave the soldiers tea and Jimmy Sullivan, a Republican leader, met the British commanders and escorted the new head of the RUC round the Falls. That showed how low the level of political consciousness still was. There were other mistakes — of which one of the most serious concerned democracy. The (Republican) Defence Committee wouldn’t hold elections for a council to run the free _ areas, or hold mass meetings to SEXCIABISTAREPUBLIC Page had come dG Free Beltast endea with only a whimper, but its significafigg.was great. It gave the people of fi ghettos their first real experience of their power and of self-organisation, For a few weeks they had held the British Army and the RUC at bay, organised to defend their own streets and areas, and generated their own media to voice their aspirations and demands, 1905 SOVIET Free Belfast should have some of the significance for Ireland that the Paris Commune and the 1905 Soviet had for the Bolsheviks in Russia. The way forward was pointed, the type of organisation which was required for a successful revolution was shown. Free Belfast showed the remarkable power of the masses united and organising themselves.