April 23, 2016 - No. 17
On the Eve of
May Day
2016
A Pro-Social
Alternative to Empire-Building
- K.C. Adams -
Ontario
Commission
on
Public
Service
• The Working Class
Must Confront
the State-Organized Power
of Those Who Control Social
Wealth
The Role of
Regulations
• Self-Regulation by
Monopoly
Interests Leads to
Criminal Negligence
- Pierre Chénier -
Nation-Building in the
21st Century or Empire-Building
• Finding a Practical
Way Forward
for the Workers' Movement
to Make the Struggle for Rights
Effective at This Time
- Rolf Gerstenberger -
100th
Anniversary of the Irish Rebellion
• Celebrate
the
Glorious
Uprising
of
the
Irish
People!
- Dougal MacDonald -
• The Irish
Declaration of Independence, April 24, 1916
• Our Duty in This Crisis
- James Connolly -
• We Only Want the
Earth
- James Connolly, 1907 -
• The Irish Rebellion
of 1916 --
The
Discussion on Self-Determination Summed Up
- V.I. Lenin -
On the Eve of May Day 2016
A Pro-Social Alternative to Empire-Building
- K.C. Adams -
All Out for May Day 2016 --
International Day
of Working Class Unity and StruggleCALENDAR
OF EVENTS
|
|
The eve of May Day 2016 is
a time for the collectives of
the working people across the country to think about their
experiences over the past year and the challenges they will
accept for the coming year. In the past year, in all sectors of
the economy, the workers and their allies continued to
valiantly resist the anti-social offensive by defending their
rights and the rights of all. In every instance, they come up against
the aim governments have set for society to make the monopolies
competitive on global markets and the privatization of social programs
and public assets, theft of pensions and benefits, downward pressure on
wages and living standards as well as defamation of unions and those
who fight. This program of governments at all levels to pay the rich
and their imposition of decisions taken on a supranational basis
serves the empire-building of the U.S. imperialists in their
collusion and contention with other big powers to establish their
hegemony all over the world. It is a nation-wrecking pursuit
which puts the task squarely before the working class to
participate in nation-building against empire-building so as to
open a path to progress. Far from discussing the choices the
rulers and their agents put before the workers, they must set
their own agenda and build a political movement capable of
achieving it.
The owners of the social
wealth the workers produce are
blocking the working class from completing the economic,
political and social transition to industrial mass production and
its associated modern relations of production. This was the
nation-building project which started with the transition from
mostly rural petty production and small-scale urban manufacturing
to industrial mass production. But today those who own and
control much of the social wealth the working class produces have
created a state and political system to deprive the working class
of its right and social responsibility to organize and move the
country to modern definitions in harmony with industrial mass
production. Powerful owners of social wealth control and run the
Canadian state and economic and political system to serve their
private interests in opposition to the public interest and
nation-building.
The narrow private interests of the owners of social
wealth
are centred on empire-building within the U.S.-led imperialist
system of states. The social wealth and companies they control
mobilize the productive power of the working class and collective
public resources of the country and state to defend and
strengthen their private empires and block the people from
affirming their rights and participating in nation-building.
The owners of social wealth
have abandoned their ideology of
free enterprise capitalism of the early period in the transition
from petty production to industrial mass production. Today, the
state and the public and private institutions under the
domination of owners of social wealth have become the main
weapons for empire-building and to strengthen and expand their
private interests.
Owners of social wealth now openly repudiate the
ideology of
free competitive enterprise and espouse the ideology of making
their private empires competitive and dominant through the direct
institutional, financial and arbitrary powers of the state within
the imperialist system of states. The objectives they pursue in
their every decision and action are centred on mobilizing the
collective social wealth and the power of the state for
empire-building in the service of their private interests.
All objections to
empire-building are brushed aside as
damaging to the economy and the provision of jobs. Selling
military weapons to odious medieval regimes such as Saudi Arabia
is hailed as providing jobs in Canada because no alternative
exists within the imperialist free trade system of
empire-building.
Sending the Canadian military abroad to suppress
nation-building projects of others and force them into the
U.S.-led imperialist system of states is touted as our
"responsibility to protect" or the retrogressive liberal ideology
of "responsible conviction."
State-organized pay-the-rich public grants, subsidies
and tax
rebates for private companies are officially lauded as "Business
Support Programs." The building of state-funded and guaranteed
social and material infrastructure by private engineering and
construction monopolies for use in empire-building is acclaimed
as job creation projects to strengthen the export-driven
economy.
The ideology of the nascent European capitalist
nation-builders of the 19th century was given rise to in
opposition to the autocratic medieval forces of petty production.
This is the ideology which was brought to what they called "the
new world." It has now been abandoned out of necessity in the
face of blatant state-organized mobilization of the country's
human and natural resources for empire-building to serve
particular private interests. The empire-builders have organized
think-tanks, panels, universities and governments to concoct
an ideology and policy objectives that serve the narrow private
interests of those who control social wealth and the state.
In contrast, the working
class confronts the ruling ideology
with its own ideological considerations, giving rise to modern
definitions on the basis of which modern nation-building can take
place. The anachronistic institutions and arrangements can be
replaced with modern ones which are consistent with the
requirements of the times. The working class out of necessity
must be materialist and dialectical in its outlook and base its
ideology on the objectivity of consideration. The historical
social conditions charge the workers with the task to complete the
transition
of society from petty production to industrial mass production.
To do so requires modern economic, political and social
conditions and institutions and relations in harmony with the
socialized forces of modern production. The thinking and ideology
of the working class must be modern in keeping with the economic
conditions of production, and how it acquires its living and
reproduces life, the forces of production and society.
The working class cannot and should not become
embroiled
in
the sectarian squabbles of the cartel political parties over
policy objectives rooted in the ideological considerations of the
ruling elite. Only by being consistent in its modern ideological
considerations and taking independent political stands on this
basis can the working class organize and activate its practical
politics and nation-building agenda. The modern ideology drives
the political movement to stop paying the rich, increase
investments in social programs and defend security by
upholding the rights of all.
Ontario Commission on Public Service
The Working Class Must Confront
the State-Organized Power of
Those
Who Control Social Wealth
The Ontario government has given rise to numerous
reports to provide ideological fodder for empire-building, such as the
Drummond Report (the report of the Commission on the Reform of
Ontario's Public Services), the Advantage Ontario Report of the Jobs
and Prosperity Council, and the Report of the Expert Panel Examining
Ontario's Business Support Program.
The essence of the Report
of the Expert Panel and others is
to give ideological support to state-organized pay-the-rich
programs and empire-building, block investments in social
programs and to outline policy objectives that more efficiently
deliver public money to private corporate interests without
controversy or opposition.
For the Expert Panel and its report, no debate exists
as to
the principle of public funding for private owners of social
wealth, the so-called Business Support Programs also known as
pay-the-rich schemes. For the Expert Panel and ruling elite, the
issue has been settled and the question is to institutionalize
the practice of the state paying the rich in the most effective
manner and with the least fuss. The ideology of the ruling elite
has solidified around state-organized empire-building and no
detractors are allowed to interfere and contradict their
wisdom.
The Report of the Expert Panel was not for public
consumption. It became available in April 2016 only through the efforts
of certain journalists two years after it was completed. In addition to
the ideological arguments for empire-building to serve private
interests, which TML Weekly
will discuss in future articles, the Report contains technical
information as to which private interests received public funds in a
particular year. Around 200 companies, each with over 500 employees and
the largest gross incomes, consistently receive the lion's share of the
$5 billion of Ontario's public funds that are doled out to private
interests annually. The Report states matter-of-factly, "Ontario's
business support programs favour the largest and oldest companies, the
companies least likely to be in need of support."
The public funds are handed
out as direct and indirect
grants, tax credits, and through publicly financed research and
development programs and hubs. Hundreds of different programs
exist to channel public funds through diverse government
departments to the monopolies active in Ontario. The pay-the-rich
programs have grandiose names such as the Jobs and Prosperity Fund and
the Southwestern Ontario Development Fund. For example, Ontario gave
$15 million to Waterloo tech firm Sandvine in 2015, which employs 500
workers globally. The company directors
said thank you very much and immediately announced plans to
distribute a similar amount as dividends to those who control its
social wealth.
Large amounts are given directly to certain monopolies
and do
not factor into the annual institutional amounts. The report
says, "The significant incentive packages provided to companies
like Cisco and OpenText" are calculated separately from the
"normal" subsidy process. Cisco Systems received $220 million in
public funds in 2013. The report says direct grants such as those
to Cisco and OpenText are only one element companies consider
when deciding to stay or leave Ontario. Other aspects include the
current rate of claims of the working class on the value it
produces, the availability of workers in the labour market,
energy rates and other user fees and the level of development of
the existing social and material infrastructure.
In a press release Cisco suggested public grant money
does
sway its position on where to settle, but that money is one of
many factors: "The collaboration with Ontario allowed Cisco
Canada to build an investment business case versus other
geographies. Cisco chooses to invest in Canada and Ontario due to
its collaborative governments, stable economy, distinguished
educational institutions, skilled workforce and progressive
immigration policy."
The direct grants to private interests are usually
provided
through the Ontario Economic Development Ministry. Similar
pay-the-rich programs exist in Quebec, all the provinces and of
course at the federal level, where the largest amounts of public
funds are distributed to select private interests.
Ontario's Economic Development Minister Brad Duguid can
approve grants or loans up to $25 million, after which they need to go
through the Treasury Board. Duguid is quoted in the mass media saying,
"Frankly, we live in a global economy that's so fiercely competitive
that we can't afford to take the old approach. You need to pick
winners, you need to support your growth firms that help build our
economy in the new economy."
Duguid said the biggest
grants -- the seven-, eight- and nine-figure ones that raise so many
eyebrows -- will by their nature eat up the largest chunk of cash. He
goes on to say that the largest grants will likely continue to go to
companies he hears want to leave or are considering moving. More often
than not, he seeks out those companies to offer them public funds
before they decide.
Ontario NDP Finance Critic Catherine Fife is quoted as
responding sarcastically, "So the minister is a travelling salesman
with a briefcase full of money. There [are] ways for government to be
supportive to businesses without doling out briefcases full of cash."
Addressing the large public grant to Cisco, she wondered after the
company's recently announced job cuts how many of the promised
positions remained. "If we knew that $220 million to a large
corporation ended up with more jobs then this conversation would be a
different one," Fife said.
This was also a concern of the Report and provided
impulse
for many of its suggested policy objectives, which it contends
are needed to improve transparency of the grant process and its
apparent randomness as billions of dollars of public money is
handed out through 65 separate business support funds overseen by
nine different ministries.
Duguid said the province has listened to the auditor,
to the
panel, to Drummond and has streamlined many grants under the
"Jobs and Prosperity Fund" and "is always working to make the
whole thing more prosperous. If we want to be globally
competitive, we're either in the [pay-the-rich] game or out of
the game."
Conservative Ontario MPP Monte McNaughton suggests the
people do support public funds for private corporate interests but
similar to NDP MPP Fife he says, "The government should at least ensure
these companies are creating the jobs they are saying they're going to
create." McNaughton wants a policy objective that data surrounding
grants is made public and possibly even that the Legislature should
vote on each grant "to make things more clear."
Duguid disagreed with this proposal saying "it would
politicize an ostensibly independent process." He used the
interview to denounce Tim Hudak, the Ontario PCs' previous
leader, who campaigned in the 2014 election against public grants
to corporations. Duguid joked that every time Hudak raised the
issue when visiting a big corporation it turned out the company
at one time or another had received government cash.
This discourse shows that the disputes within the
Ontario
cartel party system over practical politics and policy objectives
are founded in the ideological considerations of the ruling
elite. They do not deviate from the ruling ideology of
empire-building or question its essence. They argue over policy
objectives within the confines of the ruling ideology of serving
the private interests of those who control social wealth. Far
from getting sucked into this discourse, the collectives of
Ontario workers must confront the state-organized power of those
who control social wealth and put forward their own demands which
favour nation-building, not the private interests of
empire-builders.
The Role of Regulations
Self-Regulation by Monopoly Interests Leads to Criminal
Negligence
- Pierre Chénier -
Day of Mourning for Workers Killed
or Injured on the Job
2015 Day of Mourning for Workers Killed and Injured on the Job
marked in
Quebec City on April 28 with a march to the Quebec National
Assembly.
|
|
On April 28, across the country workers will observe the
National Day of Mourning for Workers Killed and Injured on the Job. The
slogan adopted by the workers' movement is Mourn for the Dead, Fight for the Living.
It
is
very
apt.
Every
day
brings
evidence
of
the
negligence
on the part
of the monopolies that leads
to injuries and deaths at work because
they consider health and safety "a cost" which interferes with their
ability to maximize profits. So too governments are removing
regulations that enforce health
and safety at work. Every day brings
evidence of the fact that industry self-regulation creates havoc
affecting not only production and the workforce but society at large.
These incidents reinforce the demand that industry self-regulation must
be banned.
Industry self-regulation is a major feature of the
neo-liberal anti-social offensive of the rich and their
governments. Self-regulation is integral to the smashing of
public authority in favour of decision-making by private
interests. It eliminates public standards enforced by a public
authority. It makes working conditions, the health and safety of
workers and communities and other aspects of the operations of
industries the private domain of private interests. Self-regulation
makes private interests that control forces of
production unaccountable for activities that are harmful to the
very lives of the workers and society.
How modern industries should run and their requirements
of
production are well known to those involved. The public standards
and regulations enforcing these requirements are an expression of
how far society has developed. Industry self-regulation driven by
narrow private interests and their aims and whims disrupts the
productive work of human beings and their efforts to take control
of the forces of production and humanize society.
Recently on April 10, two workers washing windows five
storeys up on a university building in downtown Montreal were
involved in a tragic event where one died and the other was
severely injured. The injured worker remained in a critical state
for a number of days but luckily his condition has improved to
stable.
The two workers fell more than 50 feet when the crane
holding the cage in which they were working overturned because the
truck on which it was mounted suddenly tilted. Other workers washing
windows on the site were in a state of shock and had to be taken to the
hospital as well. The man who died was the father of the worker who was
injured.
An investigation has since
revealed that the crane operator did not secure the truck properly on
solid ground and as a result the truck leaned over under the weight of
the crane. Also known now is that the crane operator had no formal
training in the standard operation of a crane. In Quebec, the training
of crane operators working on non-construction sites is not mandatory.
Non-construction crane operation is officially considered less
hazardous and it is left to private interests to decide the
qualifications of the operators.
As if the self-regulation of non-construction sites is
not already criminal enough, a health and safety representative in the
construction sector informed TML
that the Quebec Construction Commission (CCQ), the regulatory agency of
the Quebec government overseeing the construction industry, is now
lobbying to reduce the formal training of crane operators on
construction sites.
Presently, crane operators in construction must take a
780-hour course administered by the CCQ and given by construction
crane operators. The CCQ wants that course to be reduced to 180
hours and to be given by the industry itself.
Construction is well-known as the deadliest industry in
Quebec in terms of casualties at the worksite yet the government agency
is proposing self-regulation. All evidence shows that increased public
enforcement of standards and regulations is required not the opposite.
Self-regulation makes no sense and workers who do the work are fully
aware of the need for public enforcement.
The CCQ's lobbying to reduce training for crane
operators is a dictate coming from the construction companies. They
claim formal training is a cost that must be reduced and not
something integral to the modern production process. The
government, through its CCQ regulatory agency, is shamefully
making itself the instrument of this dictate of private
interests. The government is negating itself as a public
authority that must protect workers. This is unacceptable and
defies logic, but that is the state of affairs under the
neo-liberal nation-wrecking agenda, which the organized force of the
working class must defeat.
As shocking as the consequences of self-regulation is
the
pragmatism of those with power and privilege who push these
plans. In the case of the construction industry, no other
argument is given than that the current formal training of crane
operators is too costly for the companies. They partly finance
the training programs and this they profess is a hindrance to
their profits and competitiveness. Profits and competitiveness are made
the aim of the running of industries and whatever serves that aim is
considered justified whatever the consequences for workers and society.
Pragmatism is also the name
of the game in terms of the
self-regulation of railways. In 1999, the Chrétien government
introduced self-regulation with respect to rail safety and safety
programs through what is called the Railway Safety Management
System Regulations. This system entrusts the railways to work out
their own safety programs, which the government then audits and
rubber stamps. The logic behind railway self-regulation is again
that safety is a cost to the railways, which must be considered
along with all the other costs the companies have to bear in
production. The working class rejects this capital-centred
thinking and posits that the enforcement of public standards and
raising the level of the working class through training and
education add value to production, humanize society, and defend
the people's right to be.
The Chrétien deregulation put safety programs
and enforcement in the private domain of railways and even shrouded
them in secrecy to the point that railway workers and unions are not
even allowed to read the regulations. To suggest those in control of
the private railways know better than a public authority and the
workers themselves what must be done to run their operations safely is
a cruel joke. Tragedies such as the explosion and fire at
Lac-Mégantic, which killed 47 people and injured many more, are
dismissed and not considered evidence enough for governments to
conclude that railway self-regulation is dangerous for workers and
communities and must be banned.
Industry self-regulation goes against the trend of
human
beings taking control of their lives. The organized working class
movement has the social responsibility to deprive the
neo-liberals in power from blocking the progressive trend of
history. Workers must accept nothing less than the establishment
of public authorities in all sectors of the economy dedicated to
enforce the highest level of standards in the public
interest.
Self-regulation of industries is in contempt of
industrial
mass production and modern society. The organized working class
movement will not rest until all sectors of the economy are
brought under the most advanced standards enforced with a public
authority that gains the confidence of the people through its
decisive actions in defence of the public interest.
Nation-Building in the 21st Century or
Empire-Building
Finding a Practical Way Forward for
the Workers' Movement to
Make the Struggle
for Rights Effective at This Time
- Rolf Gerstenberger -
Hamilton, May 1, 2014
On the eve of May Day
2016, TML
Weekly is publishing the presentation made by
Rolf Gerstenberger at the Conference on Rights April 10 in Montreal organized by the Marxist-Leninist
Party of Quebec. Rolf is President of the Marxist-Leninist Party of
Canada and former President of Local 1005 USW.
***
Nation-building in the 21st century has to overcome the
obstacles that developed during the 20th century. These obstacles
derive primarily from the empire-building of the global monopolies and
the big powers with which they are connected. Empire-building of the
global monopolies during the twentieth century overwhelmed and defeated
the nation-builders of the nineteenth century, the nascent period of
capitalism, and the heroic nation-building attempt of the working class
in the Soviet Union.
The empire-builders have established monopoly right as
the
dominant right worldwide overpowering public right. Through free
trade under the domination of the monopolies and their global
financial agencies including the World Bank and International
Monetary Fund, the monopolies have trampled on the reality and
politics of self-reliant economies serving the well-being of the
people and acting as the material guarantor of their rights.
Brandishing the medieval dictum of
might makes right, especially
the might of the U.S. military and those of the other big powers
through military alliances such as NATO, NORAD and the U.S./Japan
military alliance, monopoly right
imposes upon the entire world the narrow private interests of
those who control great social wealth crushing public right and
the governments of laws that nation-builders have attempted to
create.
The world has entered a period of lawlessness where the
empire-builders and their monopoly right, free trade and
military might makes right are blocking the people from
solving problems in the public interest, and stifling all
efforts towards nation-building. Everything from the earlier
period, the victories and institutions of the great anti-fascist
war and dismantling of colonialism has become profane and subject
to the demand to serve the narrow private interests of the
empire-builders, especially their insatiable thirst to reap
maximum private profit from the value the working people
produce.
I worked my entire adult employed life producing steel
at
Stelco's Hamilton Steel Works. The U.S. empire-builders who
arrived in 2007 were contemptuous of our mill, did not regard it
as a precious asset in building Canada, which should have been
constantly renewed and modernized. They eventually destroyed its
main productive capacity because it did not fit into their secret
global plans, if they even had a plan other than to eliminate it
as a competitor of their U.S. mills and strip it of its assets.
The steel mill and its companion works, which at one time
stretched throughout Canada including right here in Quebec,
became pawns of the striving of private interests to amass
fortunes, not through building anything but rather through
intrigue, wrecking and state-organized pay-the-rich schemes.
Through their neo-liberal political representatives,
the
empire-builders have concocted instruments to subvert the
government of laws and long-held arrangements such as collective
agreements with the organized working class. Public revenue is
being pillaged through privatizations, P3s [public-private
partnerships] and other pay-the-rich
schemes. The rich constantly devise methods mainly based on
parasitism to "move money around" or entice the gullible to
invest in reckless schemes such as bonds of amassed subprime
mortgages, schemes that are all directed at claiming for the rich
an ever greater portion of the value the working class
produces.
One institution those who
control the monopolies have
concocted to fleece the working class and others is a kind of
kangaroo court, a Wild West show where anything goes that serves
their narrow private interests. They call it the Companies'
Creditors Arrangement Act (CCAA) which has now become so
infamous.
Stelco steel works is now in its second misadventure in
CCAA
and our comrades in Algoma Steel are in their third go-around.
The CCAA is all about wrecking and pillaging. No problems are
resolved. Nothing is built. Working lives are ruined. Retirees
suffer. Many youth never get a chance to step into industrial
production because it is dismantled and outsourced. With CCAA,
the empire-builders seek to negate all previous arrangements with
the working class such as their collective agreements or the laws
governing their pensions. In some cases, the productive entity
itself and its sales are fine but the empire-builders have gone
off the cliff elsewhere in the world -- which appears to be the
case with Essar in Sault Ste. Marie, where the global company
headquartered in one of those tax havens exposed in the Panama
Papers is deeply in debt and is facing many problems outside
Canada.
A common thread with CCAA is the refusal of the
empire-builders to face up to the contradictions of the
transitional capitalist system as they present themselves, and
the reality that problems must be resolved if the economic unit
and economy are to move forward. Proponents of neo-liberalism are
advocating free trade as the only way to sort out the problems at
Stelco and Essar. They even suggest a steel sector is not needed
in Canada and steel should simply be bought from wherever within
the global economy. Some so-called experts are quoted as saying
that our mills should be sold off as so much scrap. Essar Algoma
is located in Sault Ste. Marie, a northern Ontario city of 80,000
people where 70 per cent of the population depend on the Algoma
steel works in one way or another. Those experts who call for its
liquidation and other free trade disasters should be publicly denounced
as criminals.
The wrecking of heavy
industry is not only a great crime
against active workers, retirees and their communities but also
an enormous step backwards because it deprives our youth of a
chance to participate in industrial production. Such is the crime
of Air Canada and the Aveos scandal to attack our most important
asset of the modern world, the industrial working class. Now the
Trudeau Liberal government is rewriting history and changing
retroactively the law from 1988 that said a privatized Air Canada
would have "to maintain operational and overhaul centres in the
City of Winnipeg, the Montreal Urban Community and the City of
Mississauga." Trudeau's Transport Minister Marc Garneau has
tabled a bill to legalize Air Canada's decades-long flaunting of
that law. The mealy-mouthed empire-builder Garneau excused the
crime with the typical neo-liberal jargon saying, "We're
recognizing that in today's competitive world, Air Canada --
which competes not only in Canada but also internationally -- should
not have certain restrictions imposed upon it
which make it more difficult for it to be competitive."
Everything is excused for the greater good of the
monopolies
in opposition to the greater good and rights of the workers and
the national economy. The Trudeau Liberals want no restrictions
put on the empire-building of a privatized Air Canada so it can
compete internationally to enrich its main owners and executives
while industrial workers lose their jobs and three local
economies are weakened.
Any principle can be trampled in the mud with this
pathetic
imperialist pragmatism to give monopolies free rein and "not have
restrictions imposed on them." The human factor and objective
conditions of production are viewed as mere pawns to pay the
rich. The working class has the opposite viewpoint: for the sake
of nation-building and the public good, the monopolies must have
restrictions placed on their monopoly right and operations;
otherwise they are out-of-control train wrecks such as tragically
witnessed in Lac-Mégantic.
No nation can call itself modern and human-centred
without
public health care and education as a right for all without
exception but also no nation can be built and establish the
material basis to guarantee the rights of all without a vigorous
and large industrial working class and its objective conditions
of production. To attack industry, to wreck industry and have the
empire-builders ship it out of the country to who knows where is
to attack the industrial working class and any chance of modern
nation-building.
Vivid examples testify to the attacks on
nation-building and
the working class, such as the terrible tragedy unfolding in the
energy sector where workers and entire communities are reeling in
pain. The callous response of the Prime Minister to this pain
should be roundly denounced. His words that to be fired from the
energy sector in Edmonton is better than to be fired in Calgary,
and the unemployed in Edmonton should not receive the same number
of weeks of employment insurance can only come from someone who
was brought up and lives within a protected world of class
privilege. He certainly does not share weal and woe with the
working people. He does not have the same conditions of life as
the workers in the energy sector or Indigenous peoples on the reserves
or in urban settings. A CCAA judge is also not our peer. His
retirement conditions are not the same as ours. He should not be
ruling on our pensions. So too the Ministers who are cutting
social programs are not facing the consequences of their actions.
They may have private means to look after themselves and educate
their children. We do not.
The conclusion is that we can expect nothing from this
ruling
elite which has changed the aim of the society from serving a
public good to making the monopolies number one on world
markets.
The organized working class
has to turn the situation around
in favour of the people and their empowerment, in favour of
public right and public interest. Through organized actions with
analysis the working class can present an agenda and new
direction to stop the suffering, to put an end to the vicious
cycle of booms and busts and recurring crises. This is what we
have done at Stelco. Our slogans to Keep
Stelco
Producing,
Keep
Hamilton
Producing,
Keep
Canada
Producing represent the
expectations of the people of this country. Ours is the voice of
the working class at a time organized labour is not championing
these views, they are succumbing to the views of those who want
one section of the monopolies to prevail over another in the
inter-monopoly competition for domination over the different
sectors of the economy. They still believe that negotiations are
possible despite the dictate of the monopolies and their refusal
to negotiate and they are not forming a block to deprive those
who are depriving us of what belongs to us by right. This too is
a serious problem we have to deal with.
In building anything, the people are faced with
obstacles.
Those obstacles are found in nature and in society, especially in
the relations that bind us to a certain way of doing things. At
this point the biggest obstacle we face as nation-builders is
found in the entanglement of social relations the empire-builders
have wrapped around the objective and subjective conditions of
production. The subjective conditions are held in place primarily
through ideological entanglements that cloud our minds and make
us feel helpless and incapable of changing and building
anything.
To turn the objective
conditions of production into
instruments that serve nation-building we need to confront the
subjective conditions over which we can definitely do something.
The subjective conditions are the way we think about ourselves
and our predicament, how we relate to one another and to our
objective conditions of production and what organizational and
other measures we must take to remove the cloud and obstacles
obscuring and blocking the way forward.
The working class everywhere is faced with the
necessity of
confronting the empire-builders with its own agenda for
nation-building in the present. We know what we do not like but
we are not so sure about how to make the step forward towards
what we do like. The first step is to deprive the empire-builders
of their hold over our thinking and organizations, to deprive
them of imposing their political, economic, social and
theoretical agenda on us. We have to cast off their
capital-centred agenda and fashion our own human-centred agenda
with our own powerful organizations.
From my working life in the steel mill and fighting to
protect the interests of myself and my fellow steelworkers, I
learned firsthand that without organization and without combating
the ideological pressure the resistance cannot be sustained.
Without internal organizing and ideologizing there can be no
external strength and practical politics amongst the broad masses
of the people; and conversely, without using the internal
organizing and ideologizing to advance and broaden the external
strength and practical politics amongst the people, the internal
organizing withers, becomes dogmatic and eventually
collapses.
We learned this at Stelco with the help of the
Communist
Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) and its leadership. Without
the internal strength of organizing and thinking things through
and summing them up, without taking our own thinking and agenda
out to the entire working class in the mills and city and our
allies in other strata throughout the city, province and country
we could not prevail. But even then we could not prevent the
attacks of the empire-builders because they control the social
wealth; they control the objective conditions of production; they
control the official politics and instruments of state power. We
soon realized we need the organization and numerical strength of
the entire working class and its allies from coast to coast to
coast throughout Canada and Quebec if our own organizing and
practical politics are to advance within a broad nation-building
project.
We have to consolidate this organizational internal
strength
so that we can extend it externally to the entire working class
and all those yearning for empowerment and a modern agenda for
nation-building.
In June 2013 Local 1005 USW celebrated 10 years of Thursday meetings
where workers
develop their
independent politics.
Let me speak on some practical things we have learned
about the human-centred economic agenda through our 20-year struggle at
Stelco to defend our rights in the face of monopoly right.
The steel sector is dominated by empire-builders. We
have
U.S. Steel, Essar, ArcelorMittal and a few others. They all like
to complain that Chinese steel is the main problem plaguing the
steel sector in North America. How could Chinese steel be the
problem in your own economy if that economy has a nation-building
agenda? It would never be a problem and possibly even a blessing
under a trading regime of mutual benefit in supplying certain
types of steel that we have yet to learn how to produce and which
we could learn from them and they could learn from us.
If the public in a nation cannot exercise control over
what
products come in and leave, then what kind of national economy is
that? Certainly not one under the control of the actual producers
and broad masses of the people, serving the public good and
interests and constantly being strengthened. The global
monopolies control imports and exports under free trade. If the
steel monopolies were serious about building a Canadian steel
sector, they would be opposed to free trade but they are not and
their political champion now is Trudeau. For them, free trade is
the freedom to dictate their views and private interests on us
and on the Chinese and everyone else. They want to whine when
some imports hurt their particular sales but they do not want a
public authority that can control what comes into the country and
at what prices. They are hypocrites who simply want to divert the
working class from taking up its own agenda to deprive the
empire-builders of imposing their anti-social anti-national
agenda.
The human-centred agenda
for the steel sector is quite simple
in its initial stage. Steel is a strategic product for any
economy. Any nation, especially one as large as Canada and Quebec
must produce enough steel to meet the economy's apparent need
with an appropriate quality without disruptions.
The empire-builders say no, no, that is bad, that will
not be
good for the economy. They say this with a straight face even in
the face of the recurring crises and serious problems of their
free trade empire-building agenda where bankruptcy protection is
more common than not and brandished as a threat against the
working class and where without pay-the-rich schemes from the
public treasury the monopolies say they cannot compete and
survive.
Why is it not good for the economy to produce what the
economy needs and to build up the internal skill and expertise and
objective conditions of production to meet those needs without ups and
downs, wild swings and crises? You hardly have any steel production
anymore in Quebec. Why is it shipped in from elsewhere at great expense
and to the detriment of the Quebec working class? Because Quebec has
been victimized by the empire-builders and has had its nation-building
project hijacked and suppressed. All five regions of Canada should have
a vigorous self-reliant steel sector -- the Maritimes, Quebec, Ontario,
the Prairies and BC.
What about prices of production? The energy, steel and
raw material sectors are all suffering because global market prices
have fallen. Why should prices fall below their prices of production?
Why do market prices fluctuate wildly up and down away from their
prices of production? Because we humans are not in control. We humans
pride ourselves on controlling the forces of production to produce
steel from raw material to finished product. We pride ourselves on the
ability to bring oil and iron ore out of the ground and refine it for
our use and put airlines into the air and spaceships into space, but
when it comes to pricing commodities we stare at each other dumbfounded
because the empire-builders tell us some non-human magician is in
charge of prices, some non-human force called the market with its
invisible hand is controlling the prices and nothing can or should be
done. Can you imagine this nonsense that nothing can be done? We humans
can send fellow humans into space and transform heat into mechanical
motion but nothing can be done to control prices. Meanwhile our lives
are turned upside down because this mysterious non-human market kicks
us in the gut. This monopoly dictate is anti-human nonsense that should
be rejected with contempt.
In January 2004, steel
prices were low and Stelco executives said the company had a liquidity
problem because of low prices and because they wanted to rid the
company of steelworkers' defined-benefit pensions. But the
empire-builders in control had an even bigger agenda; they saw an
opportunity to make a big score using the weapon of CCAA. So they went
into CCAA bankruptcy protection, which our Local 1005 immediately
denounced as a fraud. And you know what? Within the first month in
CCAA, steel prices jumped higher and the company was having not one but
month after month of stupendous profits, some of the best on record.
But this did not stop them from continuing the CCAA fraud and
manipulating the situation in an effort to eliminate our
defined-benefit pensions and hit a big score. Well, they did hit a big
score three years later with the sale of the company to U.S. Steel but
they did not eliminate our pensions because of steelworkers' organized
resistance.
Steelworkers in Local 1005 refused to participate in
the CCAA
farce. We denounced it from the beginning as a fraud and produced
reams of material to prove our point; we took our views out into
the community and won widespread support and saved our
defined-benefit pensions for the time being. But the
empire-builders are persistent; they kept hammering away at us.
The province gave the schemers $150 million and an extension of
the payment holiday to make the pension plans whole until the end
of 2015. So Stelco was fattened up so to speak for the sell-out
to U.S. Steel and that monopoly with its many mills in the U.S.
and Europe proved to be an even bigger enemy with more resources
to attack us and attack us they did.
Ontario's $150 million was essentially the entire
equity
value of the company at the time Stelco exited CCAA, when its
debts and obligations were considered. Instead of the province
giving the money to the schemers so they could then turn around
and sell the company for a big score to U.S. Steel, the province
could have bought Stelco outright and made something of it
instead of the wrecking mess that U.S. Steel has thrown in our
faces.
But an important point in
all this is that the province buying the mills would not have been
enough. Public buying of companies under the control of the
empire-builders is not enough to turn the economy around in a new
direction towards nation-building. More often than not at this point in
history so-called nationalization, such as the U.S. and Canadian
governments' purchase of General Motors during the economic crisis in
2008-09, is to pay the rich. That was not called a nationalization but
ownership of shares, as part of the general empire-building agenda to
pay the rich. Today both the Quebec and the federal governments are
making arrangements to fork over a lot of money to Bombardier all in
the name of saving jobs. But it too is for empire-building and to pay
the rich.
If nationalization is to amount to anything positive in
the public interest, it must be part of a broad nation-building agenda
where the aim of the society must be set by the workers and people
themselves. As an example, in the steel sector it must include the
building of public institutions with the authority to control the
wholesale market and prices, with the authority to control what comes
in and goes out of the country. It has to be part of a nation-building
project to deprive the empire-builders of their power to pay the rich
and block nation building, the power to deprive the empire builders of
the power to deprive the people of their rights, interests and future.
It must be a new direction for the economy.
We steelworkers know exactly what value goes into
producing
steel. We know the transferred-value that we transfer and
preserve in the steel from the value of inputs of material,
energy, machines and buildings. We know how much work-time we put into
the steel to produce and reproduce value, which is the new value we
create. The new value together with the old
value from the inputs is the total value. It is not a big
mystery. With the knowledge of the sum of the new and old value,
a modern formula exists to find the price of production of all
commodities with an average rate of profit, and that should
become the exchange-value in the market.
The internal market of a
self-reliant diverse Canadian and Quebec economy should be the base
from which our economy reaches out to others internationally and trades
for mutual benefit. With a public institution in control, a public
wholesale sector of basic commodities is not only possible but
necessary for the good of the economy and to free it from recurring
crises. Not just any old public institution but one where the actual
producers from each sector are actively and consciously involved to
defend their interests and those of the public, a public institution in
which the public has confidence in exercising its control and oversight
so that it remains free from corruption, monopoly right and narrow
private interests.
Issues of public concern exist with all economic
sectors, but
of particular importance is the building of social programs and
public services that guarantee the rights of the people. No
excuse should be tolerated for interference from the rich and
their monopolies in the building of social programs and public
services, the vast public social and material infrastructure that
a modern nation needs and without which the economy cannot
function, cannot guarantee the rights of the people. Public
enterprise, social programs and public services are a great
guarantor of stability in the economy and cornerstone of the
people's well-being and source of revenue for the state.
The Trudeau empire-builders are saying they are going
to
invest in infrastructure. But two very different agendas surround
the building of infrastructure: empire-building versus
nation-building. The Trudeau Liberals are borrowing vast sums
from the global financial oligarchy, over $100 billion in the
initial stages. That is not nation-building. That is indebting
the people to the international plutocrats who want nothing
better than to park their social wealth in Canadian government
bonds even when the interest rate is low. No better safe place
exists at this point where the empire-builders can put their
excess money. The interest service charges on this Trudeau debt
over the years covered in budget 2016 will be greater even than
the sum of deficits.
Nation-building cannot advance with the private
financial
plutocrats in control of the country's social wealth. The
financial sector now dominated by the big private banks,
insurance and lending monopolies must change and be challenged by
public enterprises. All the regulations that protect the private
financial enterprises, provide them with public funds and allow
them to control the money supply must be renewed on a modern
basis if any advance is to be made in overcoming the recurring
economic crises and in nation-building.
No excuse exists for public borrowing from private
interests.
No excuse exists to allow private banks to control the money
supply to serve their narrow private interests for
empire-building. Public banks should become the norm in all
regions along with a strengthened Bank of Canada in which
Canadians can have confidence and over which they can exercise
control. No excuse exists for the continued existence of the big
private financial enterprises where Canadians put their social
wealth, which the state supports through pay-the-rich schemes,
and a handful of autocrats control and dictate how the country's
social wealth is distributed and used.
Another aspect of Trudeau's
empire-building infrastructure agenda is very simply who is in control.
The Trudeau Liberals and those in Quebec and elsewhere all hand over
control of the building of infrastructure to the big private
monopolies. They have even concocted a fanciful term called
public-private partnerships or P3s. Giant construction companies such
as Bechtel from the U.S., SNC Lavalin and others gorge themselves at
the trough of publicly funded and guaranteed infrastructure projects
including military projects such as the building of Coast Guard and
Navy ships, helicopters and fighter jets. This should change; it must
change for Quebec and Canada to advance. Social and material
infrastructure must be public from beginning to end and throughout
their productive lives; they must be public from top to bottom from
building structures to supplying those hospitals and educational
institutions with material supplies and the human factor.
Another crucial aspect of infrastructure
empire-building that
must change is how the produced value from the social and
material infrastructure is realized or rather not realized at
present. Instead of an exchange of equivalent value,
infrastructure value is paid for mostly from individual taxation,
which is a farce as infrastructure is mostly means of production
not articles of consumption.
All economic units active in the economy, both public
and
private, must realize or pay for the value they consume that
comes from the social and material infrastructure. The value that
economic units consume from public health care, education and the
vast network of transportation, roads, bridges, mass transit,
water, sewage, waste disposal etc. must be realized as a normal
aspect of doing business. Just as we steelworkers know exactly
the price of production of what we produce so too do those active
in the social and material infrastructure know the price of
production of what they produce or at least they would know once
organized to do so. How to price the value they produce and how
much the economic units in the economy consume, and should
therefore realize as buyers of value are all matters of economic
science and entirely knowable. For as long as the economy is
based on the production of commodities for exchange and not use
then the value of our social and material infrastructure, our
national means of production, much be exchanged and realized
similar to any means of production consumed within the
economy.
This issue raises the importance of renewing the
taxation
system and eliminating all forms of individual taxation such as
income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes and user fees for
public services, and instituting state claims on the value it
requires directly from the economy through public enterprise and
other methods and not indirectly from workers and other
individuals. Finding a new direction for the taxation system, on
how the state claims the value it requires directly from the
economy is an important issue the working class must take up as
part of its nation-building agenda.
Finally on the economic front, it is important to have
some
discussion on wages and benefits that make up workers' individual
reproduced-value, which has been the traditional area of main
concern of trade unions. Within the nation-building agenda,
individual reproduced-value is important and the working class is
in a constant battle to defend and improve the individual claim
on the value workers produce. But individual reproduced-value is
just one portion of the new value the working class produces and
reproduces, and which workers and the nation need to guarantee
their and their families' well-being throughout their lives and
for the economy to grow and thrive and become modern and gain the
capacity to humanize the social and natural environment.
The other parts of the new value workers produce, the
social
reproduced-value and added-value, are essential for
nation-building and should be on the radar of the working class
and central within its human-centred agenda. I already mentioned
the social reproduced-value, which is that part of the newly
produced value that reproduces the social infrastructure, the
public health care, education and other social programs necessary
for any modern nation. The individual and social reproduced-value
is in contradiction with the added-value because the added-value
plus reproduced-value is the new value workers produce during
their work-time. The added-value is the value available to expand
the economy so that it can meet the growing needs of all and
guarantee their rights. No nation-building project can succeed
without an agenda to defend social reproduced-value and to expand
control over the added-value in opposition to the claims of the
empire-builders, and to enhance the social and material
infrastructure and ensure it is properly realized. This should
all be on our plates as nation-builders not just the defence of
our individual reproduced-value.
The working class as the
advanced force and actual producers
must expand its control over the entire new value it produces.
Only in that way can it guarantee that the social wealth it
produces goes towards guaranteeing the rights of the people,
their empowerment and nation-building. The working class with
organization and its own thinking and agenda can deprive the
empire-builders of their power to deprive the people and nation
of their rights.
The first task is to challenge the ideological
underpinnings
of their sell-out and warmongering agenda. It is to say NO! to
their schemes, as the workers and people are already doing so
that they cannot say they have our consent. It is to make that
voice heard countrywide.
This great organizational task may look forbidding but
it is doable. The Marxist-Leninist Party has the organization. It has
very experienced cadre and must train more cadre -- especially young
people of working class origin as well as others it requires and step
up the work to strengthen the Workers' Centre of the Marxist-Leninist
Party to smash the silence on the living and working conditions faced
by workers in all sectors of the economy and, most importantly, to
share their experiences in fighting the anti-social offensive. This
requires funds which is an important aspect but the decisive factor is
the human factor -- the human beings who see the necessity of this at
this time. We can sit with them and help them to carry out this work.
I urge you to take up this great organizational work.
Take up this work of ideological and political mobilization so as to
seize the reins of nation-building in the 21st century!
100th Anniversary of the Irish Rebellion
Celebrate the Glorious Uprising of the Irish People!
- Dougal MacDonald -
1991 mural in Belfast marking the 75th anniversary of the Irish
Rebellion. In foreground are the Republicans who signed the
proclamation of independence.
|
|
The Easter Rising (Éirí Amach na
Cásca), also known as the Easter Rebellion, was an armed
uprising in Ireland during Easter Week in 1916, from April 24-29. The
Rising was part of the centuries-long ongoing struggle of the Irish
people for independence from England, which began in 1169 with Henry
II's annexation of Ireland. The Rising was no isolated incident or
"putsch" as some labeled it at the time to denigrate it. The Irish
people have always resisted British rule without letup. Prior to the
Rising, at least 20 other separate rebellions had taken place since the
16th century, including within Canada. The single-minded aim of the
Irish people has always been to fight to win their independence by
ending British colonial rule so as to be free to decide their own
destiny.
James Connolly
|
The Easter Rising was organized by the Military Council
of the Irish Republican Brotherhood, led by James Connolly, Patrick
(Padraig) Pearse, Tom Clarke, Sean McDermott, Joseph Plunkett, Thomas
MacDonagh, and Eamonn Ceannt. On the morning of April 24, approximately
1,200 Irish Volunteers, Citizen Army members, and members of the Cumann
na mBan, the paramilitary Irishwomen's Council took over key locations
in Dublin city centre (about 90 women took up arms in the rebellion).
The Citizen Army was a defence organization formed during the Dublin
Lockout of 1913 by James Connolly to protect strikers from police
attacks. The main places which were occupied around Dublin were the
General Post Office (GPO) which was the main headquarters, the Four
Courts, the South Dublin Union, Boland's Mill and Jacob's biscuit
factory. Patrick Pearse immediately announced the birth of the Irish
Republic by reading a proclamation signed by the seven leaders. The
Rising took place mainly in Dublin but there were also isolated actions
in other counties, including Cork, Tyrone, Donegal, Meath, Louth,
Wexford and Galway.
The British were at first taken by surprise as they had
only 1,269
troops in the city on April 24. Lord Wimborne, the Lord-Lieutenant of
Ireland, declared martial law and handed power to Brigadier-General
William Lowe. Unfortunately, the rebels had failed to secure either of
Dublin's two main train stations or either of its ports, which allowed
the British to bring in thousands of reinforcements from England and
from their garrisons at the Curragh and Belfast. By the end of the
week, British strength stood at over 16,000 men, vastly outnumbering
the rebel forces. Fierce fighting took place over the next six days in
a number of locations. Field artillery and the guns of the patrol
vessel Helga were directed against the rebels. On April
29, Patrick Pearse called on the rebels to cease fire and to surrender.
Proclamation of the Irish Republic, April 24, 1916
The British Army reported casualties of 116 dead, 368
wounded and nine missing. Sixteen policemen died and 29 were wounded.
Rebel and civilian casualties were 318 dead and 2,217 wounded. The
Volunteers and Citizen Army recorded 64 killed in action. The majority
of civilian casualties were the result of direct and indirect fire from
British artillery, heavy machine guns and incendiary shells, none of
which the rebels had access to. The British shooting was
indiscriminate. As is the way with all occupying forces, the British
considered anyone not in a British uniform as an enemy and fair game.
Following the Rising, the British arrested a total of 3,430 men and 79
women. Most were subsequently released.
In May, military court martials were held and 93
rebels,
including one woman, were sentenced to death by the British
Military Court, presided over by Colonel Charles Blackader,
commander of the 59th brigade of the 177th regiment which had
fought against the rebels. Nearly 2,000 rebels were deported to
England where they were imprisoned without trial. Fifteen rebels were
executed by firing squad at Dublin's Kilmainham Gaol, including
the seven leaders who signed the proclamation of the Irish
Republic. One was hanged later. James Connolly, who was wounded
in battle, was shot on May 12, 1916, tied to a chair with no
blindfold. The British medical officer who attended the
executions stated: "They all died like Lions."
The Easter Rising resulted in the workers seizing power
for just six days. It was another important step in the fight to free
Ireland from colonial rule. Lenin wrote in 1916, just prior to the
Rising: "The very fact that revolts do break out at different times, in
different places, and are of different kinds, guarantees wide scope and
depth to the general movement; but it is only in premature, individual,
sporadic and therefore unsuccessful, revolutionary movements that the
masses gain experience, acquire knowledge, gather strength, and get to
know their real leaders, the socialist proletarians, and in this way
prepare for the general onslaught."
Women played an important role in the Rebellion, with many members of
Cumann
na mBan,
the women’s auxiliary branch of the Irish Volunteers, fighting
for independence. (R. Barracks)
The Irish Declaration of Independence, April 24, 1916
Poblacht na hEireann
The Provisional Government
of the
Irish
Republic
"To the People of Ireland"
Irishmen and Irishwomen:
In the name of God and of the dead generations from
which she
receives the old tradition of nationhood, Ireland, through us,
summons her children to her flag, and strikes for her
freedom.
Having organized and
trained her manhood through her
secret
revolutionary organization, the Irish Republican Brotherhood, and
through her open military organizations, the Irish Volunteers and
the Irish Citizen Army, having patiently perfected her
discipline, having resolutely waited for the right moment to
reveal itself, she now seizes that moment, and, supported by her
exiled children in America and by gallant allies in Europe, but
relying in the first on her own strength, she strikes in full
confidence of victory.
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 arms 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 of its exaltation among
the nations.
The Irish Republic is entitled to, and hereby claims,
the
allegiance of every Irishman and Irish woman. The Republic
guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal
opportunities of 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 of the differences carefully fostered by an alien
government, which have divided a minority in the past.
1941 stamp commemorating Easter Rebellion
|
Until our arms have brought the opportune moment for
the
establishment of a permanent National Government, representative
of the whole people of Ireland and elected by the suffrages of
all her men and women, the Provisional Government, hereby
constituted, will administer the civil and military affairs of
the Republic in trust for the people.
We place the cause of the Irish Republic under the
protection
of the Most High God, Whose blessing we invoke upon our arms, and
we pray that no one who serves that cause will dishonour it by
cowardice, inhumanity, or rapine. In this supreme hour the Irish
nation must, by its valour and discipline and by the readiness of
its children to sacrifice themselves for the common good, prove
itself worthy of the august destiny to which it is called.
Signed on behalf of the Provisional Government
Thomas J Clarke,
Sean MacDiarmada, Thomas MacDonagh, PH
Pearse,
Eamon Ceannt, James Connolly, Joseph Plunket
Our Duty in This Crisis
- James Connolly, Irish Worker, August 8,
1914 -
What should be the attitude to the working-class
democracy
of Ireland in face of the present crisis? I wish to emphasise the
fact that the question is addressed to the 'working-class
democracy' because I believe that it would be worse than foolish -- it
would be a crime against all our hopes and aspirations -- to
take counsel in this matter from any other source.
Soviet painting depicting an injured James Connolly during the Rebellion
|
Mr. John E. Redmond has just earned the plaudits of all
the
bitterest enemies of Ireland and slanderers of the Irish race by
declaring, in the name of Ireland that the British Government can
now safely withdraw all its garrisons from Ireland, and that the
Irish slaves will guarantee to protect the Irish estate of
England until their masters come back to take possession -- a
statement that announces to all the world that Ireland has at
last accepted as permanent this status of a British province.
Surely no inspiration can be sought from that source.
The advanced Nationalists have neither a policy nor a
leader.
During the Russian Revolution such of their Press as existed in
and out of Ireland, as well as their spokesmen, orators and
writers vied with each other in laudation of Russia and
vilification of all the Russian enemies of Czardom. It was freely
asserted that Russia was the natural enemy of England; that the
heroic revolutionalists were in the pay of the English Government
and that every true Irish patriot ought to pray for the success
of the armies of the Czar.
Now, as I, amongst other Irish Socialists, predicted
all
along, when the exigencies of diplomacy makes it suitable, the
Russian bear and the English lion are hunting together and every
victory for the Czar's Cossacks is a victory for the paymasters
of those King's Own Scottish Borderers who, but the other day,
murdered the people of Dublin in cold blood. Surely the childish
intellects that conceived of the pro-Russian campaign of nine
years ago cannot give us light and leading in any campaign for
freedom from the British allies of Russia today? It is well to
remember also that in this connection since 1909 the enthusiasm
for the Russians was replaced in the same quarter by as blatant a
propaganda in favour of the German War Lord. But since the guns
did begin to speak in reality this propaganda had died out in
whispers, whilst without a protest, the manhood of Ireland was
pledged to armed warfare against the very power our advanced
Nationalist friends have wasted so much good ink in
acclaiming.
Of late, sections of the advanced Nationalist press
have lent
themselves to a desperate effort to misrepresent the position of
the Carsonites, and to claim for them the admiration of Irish
Nationalists on the grounds that these Carsonites were fearless
Irishmen who had refused to take dictation from England. A more
devilishly mischievous and lying doctrine was never preached in
Ireland. The Carsonite position is indeed plain -- so plain that
nothing but sheer perversity of purpose can misunderstand it, or
cloak it with a resemblance to Irish patriotism. The Carsonites
say that their fathers were planted in this country to assist in
keeping the natives down in subjection that this country might be
held for England. That this was God's will because the Catholic
Irish were not fit for the responsibilities and powers of free
men and that they are not fit for the exercise of these
responsibilities and powers till this day. Therefore, say the
Carsonites, we have kept our side of the bargain; we have refused
to admit the Catholics to power and responsibility; we have
manned the government of this country for England, we propose to
continue to do so, and rather than admit that these Catholics --
these 'mickies and teagues' -- are our equals, we will fight, in
the hope that our fighting will cause the English people to
revolt against their government and re-establish us in our
historic position as an English colony in Ireland, superior to,
and unhampered by, the political institutions of the Irish
natives.
How this can be represented as the case of Irishmen
refusing
to take dictation from England passeth all comprehension. It is
rather the case of a community in Poland, after 250 years
colonisation, still refusing to adopt the title of natives, and
obstinately clinging to the position and privileges of a dominant
colony. Their programme is summed up in the expression which
forms the dominant note of all their speeches, sermons and
literature:
"We are loyal British subjects. We hold this country
for
England. England cannot desert us."
What light or leading then can Ireland get from the
hysterical patriots who so egregiously misrepresent this fierce
contempt for Ireland as something that ought to win the esteem of
Irishmen?
What ought to be the attitude of the working-class
democracy
of Ireland in face of the present crisis?
In the first place, then, we ought to clear our minds
of all
the political cant which would tell us that we have either 'natural
enemies' or 'natural allies' in any of the powers now
warring. When it is said that we ought to unite to protect our
shores against the 'foreign enemy' I confess to be unable to
follow that line of reasoning, as I know of no foreign enemy of
this country except the British Government and know that it is
not the British Government that is meant.
In the second place we ought to seriously consider that
the
evil effects of this war upon Ireland will be simply
incalculable, that it will cause untold suffering and misery
amongst the people, and that as this misery and suffering have
been brought upon us because of our enforced partisanship with a
nation whose government never consulted us in the matter, we are
therefore perfectly at liberty morally to make any bargain we may
see fit, or that may present itself in the course of events.
Should a German army land in
Ireland tomorrow we should
be
perfectly justified in joining it if by doing so we could rid
this country once and for all from its connection with the
Brigand Empire that drags us unwillingly into this war.
Should the working class of Europe, rather than
slaughter
each other for the benefit of kings and financiers, proceed
tomorrow to erect barricades all over Europe, to break up bridges
and destroy the transport service that war might be abolished, we
should be perfectly justified in following such a glorious
example and contributing our aid to the final dethronement of the
vulture classes that rule and rob the world.
But pending either of these consummations it is our
manifest
duty to take all possible action to save the poor from the
horrors this war has in store.
Let it be remembered that there is no natural scarcity
of
food in Ireland. Ireland is an agricultural country, and can
normally feed all her people under any sane system of things. But
prices are going up in England and hence there will be an immense
demand for Irish produce. To meet that demand all nerves will be
strained on this side, the food that ought to feed the people of
Ireland will be sent out of Ireland in greater quantities than
ever and famine prices will come in Ireland to be immediately
followed by famine itself. Ireland will starve, or rather the
townspeople of Ireland will starve, that the British army and
navy and jingoes may be fed. Remember, the Irish farmer like all
other farmers will benefit by the high prices of the war, but
these high prices will mean starvation to the labourers in the
towns. But without these labourers the farmers' produce cannot
leave Ireland without the help of a garrison that England cannot
now spare. We must consider at once whether it will not be our
duty to refuse to allow agricultural produce to leave Ireland
until provision is made for the Irish working class.
Let us not shrink from the consequences. This may mean
more
than a transport strike, it may mean armed battling in the
streets to keep in this country the food for our people. But
whatever it may mean it must not be shrunk from. It is the
immediately feasible policy of the working-class democracy, the
answer to all the weaklings who in this crisis of our country's
history stand helpless and bewildered crying for guidance, when
they are not hastening to betray her.
Starting thus, Ireland may yet set the torch to a
European
conflagration that will not burn out until the last throne and
the last capitalist bond and debenture will be shrivelled on the
funeral pyre of the last war lord.
We Only Want the Earth
- James Connolly, 1907 -
Some men, faint-hearted,
ever seek
Our programme to retouch,
And will insist, whene'er
they speak
That we demand too much.
'Tis passing strange, yet
I declare
Such statements give me
mirth,
For our demands most modest are,
We only want the earth.
"Be moderate," the trimmers cry,
Who dread the tyrants' thunder.
"You ask too much and people fly
From you aghast in wonder."
'Tis passing strange, for I declare
Such statements give me mirth,
For our demands most moderate are,
We only want the earth.
Our masters all a godly crew,
Whose hearts throb for the poor,
Their sympathies assure us, too,
If our demands were fewer.
Most generous souls! But please observe,
What they enjoy from birth
Is all we ever had the nerve
To ask, that is, the earth.
The "labour fakir" full of guile,
Base doctrine ever preaches,
And whilst he bleeds the rank and file
Tame moderation teaches.
Yet, in despite, we'll see the day
When, with sword in its girth,
Labour shall march in war array
To realize its own, the earth.
For labour long, with sighs and tears,
To its oppressors knelt.
But never yet, to aught save fears,
Did the heart of tyrant melt.
We need not kneel, our cause no dearth
Of loyal soldiers' needs
And our victorious rallying cry
Shall be we want the earth!
The Irish Rebellion of 1916 --
The Discussion on
Self-Determination Summed Up
- V.I. Lenin -
Painting "Birth of the Irish Republic"
The
following is an excerpt from the article by V. I. Lenin, "The
Discussion on Self-Determination Summed Up," first published in October
1916. Lenin wrote to clarify the issue of self-determination of nations
including the significance of the Irish Rebellion in opposition to the
opportunist and chauvinist theses put forward by Polish
social-democrats and the so-called Zimmerwald Leftists. These theses
dismissed the revolt of oppressed nations such as Ireland and the
important role of their struggle for their right to self-determination
in the proletarian revolution. In his conclusion, Lenin pointed out,
"The epoch of imperialism has turned all the ‘great' powers into the
oppressors of a number of nations, and the development of imperialism
will inevitably lead to a more definite division of trends in this
question in international Social-Democracy as well."
***
Our theses were written before the outbreak of this
rebellion, which must be the touchstone of our theoretical
views.
The views of the opponents of self-determination lead
to the
conclusion that the vitality of small nations oppressed by
imperialism has already been sapped, that they cannot play any
role against imperialism, that support of their purely national
aspirations will lead to nothing, etc. The imperialist war of
1914-16 has provided facts which refute such
conclusions.
The war proved to be an epoch of crisis for the
West-European
nations, and for imperialism as a whole. Every crisis discards
the conventionalities, tears away the outer wrappings, sweeps
away the obsolete and reveals the underlying springs and forces.
What has it revealed from the standpoint of the movement of
oppressed nations? In the colonies there have been a number of
attempts at rebellion, which the oppressor nations, naturally did
all they could to hide by means of a military censorship.
Nevertheless, it is known that in Singapore the British brutally
suppressed a mutiny among their Indian troops; that there were
attempts at rebellion in French Annam (see Nashe Slovo) and
in the German Cameroons (see the Junius pamphlet); that in
Europe, on the one hand, there was a rebellion in Ireland, which
the "freedom-loving" English, who did not dare to extend
conscription to Ireland, suppressed by executions, and, on the
other, the Austrian Government passed the death sentence on the
deputies of the Czech Diet "for treason," and shot whole Czech
regiments for the same "crime."
This list is, of course, far from complete.
Nevertheless, it
proves that, owing to the crisis of imperialism, the flames
of national revolt have flared up both in the colonies and
in Europe, and that national sympathies and antipathies have
manifested themselves in spite of the Draconian threats and
measures of repression. All this before the crisis of imperialism
hit its peak; the power of the imperialist bourgeoisie was yet to
be undermined (this may be brought about by a war of "attrition"
but has not yet happened) and the proletarian movements in the
imperialist countries were still very feeble. What will happen
when the war has caused complete exhaustion, or when, in one
state at least, the power of the bourgeoisie has been shaken
under the blows of proletarian struggle, as that of tsarism in
1905?
On May 9, 1916, there appeared in Berner Tagwacht,
the
organ
of
the
Zimmerwald
group,
including
some
of
the
Leftists,
an
article
on
the
Irish
rebellion
entitled
"Their
Song
Is
Over"
and
signed
with
the
initials
K.R.
It
described
the
Irish
rebellion as being nothing more nor less than a "putsch," for, as
the author argued, "the Irish question was an agrarian one," the
peasants had been pacified by reforms, and the nationalist
movement remained only a "purely urban, petty-bourgeois movement,
which, notwithstanding the sensation it caused, had not much
social backing."
It is not surprising that this monstrously doctrinaire
and
pedantic assessment coincided with that of a Russian
national-liberal Cadet, Mr. A. Kulisher (Rech, No.
102,
April 15, 1916)[1], who also
labelled the rebellion "the Dublin
putsch."
It is to be hoped that, in accordance with the adage,
"it's
an ill wind that blows nobody any good," many comrades, who were
not aware of the morass they were sinking into by repudiating
"self-determination" and by treating the national movements of
small nations with disdain, will have their eyes opened by the
"accidental" coincidence of opinion held by a Social-Democrat and
a representative of the imperialist bourgeoisie!!
The term "putsch," in its scientific sense, may be
employed
only when the attempt at insurrection has revealed nothing but a
circle of conspirators or stupid maniacs, and has aroused no
sympathy among the masses. The centuries-old Irish national
movement, having passed through various stages and combinations
of class interest, manifested itself, in particular, in a mass
Irish National Congress in America (Vorwarts, March 20,
1916) which called for Irish independence; it also manifested
itself in street fighting conducted by a section of the urban
petty bourgeoisie and a section of the workers after a long
period of mass agitation, demonstrations, suppression of
newspapers, etc. Whoever calls such a rebellion a "putsch"
is either a hardened reactionary, or a doctrinaire hopelessly
incapable of envisaging a social revolution as a living
phenomenon.
Memorial at the site in Frongnoch, Wales where Irish patriots were
interned following the 1916 Rebellion.
|
To imagine that social revolution is conceivable
without
revolts
by
small
nations in the colonies and in Europe, without
revolutionary outbursts by a section of the petty
bourgeoisie with all its prejudices, without a movement of
the politically non-conscious proletarian and semi-proletarian
masses against oppression by the landowners, the church, and the
monarchy, against national oppression, etc. -- to imagine all this
is to repudiate social revolution. So one army lines up in
one place and says, "We are for socialism," and another,
somewhere else and says, "We are for imperialism," and that will
be a social revolution! Only those who hold such a ridiculously
pedantic view could vilify the Irish rebellion by calling it 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 is.
The Russian Revolution of 1905 was a
bourgeois-democratic
revolution. It consisted of a series of battles in
which all the discontented classes, groups and elements of
the population participated. Among these there were masses imbued
with the crudest prejudices, with the vaguest and most fantastic
aims of struggle; there were small groups which accepted Japanese
money, there were speculators and adventurers, etc.
But objectively, the mass movement was breaking the back of
tsarism and paving the way for democracy; for this reason the
class-conscious workers led it.
The socialist revolution in Europe cannot be anything
other
than
an
outburst
of
mass
struggle
on
the
part
of
all
and
sundry
oppressed
and
discontented
elements.
Inevitably,
sections
of
the
petty
bourgeoisie
and
of
the
backward
workers will
participate in it -- without such participation, mass struggle
is impossible, without it no revolution is
possible -- and just as inevitably will they bring into the movement
their prejudices, their reactionary fantasies, their weaknesses
and errors. But objectively they will attack capital,
and the class-conscious vanguard of the revolution, the advanced
proletariat, expressing this objective truth of a variegated and
discordant, motley and outwardly fragmented, mass struggle, will be
able to unite and direct it, capture power, seize the banks,
expropriate the trusts which all hate (though for different
reasons!), and introduce other dictatorial measures which in
their totality will amount to the overthrow of the bourgeoisie
and the victory of socialism, which, however, will by no means
immediately "purge" itself of petty-bourgeois slag.
Social-Democracy, we read in the Polish theses (I, 4),
"must
utilise the struggle of the young colonial bourgeoisie against
European imperialism in order to sharpen the revolutionary
crisis in Europe." (Authors' italics.)
Is it not clear that it is least of all permissible to
contrast Europe to the colonies in this respect? The
struggle of the oppressed nations in Europe, a struggle
capable of going all the way to insurrection and street fighting,
capable of breaking down the iron discipline of the army and
martial law, will "sharpen the revolutionary crisis in Europe" to
an infinitely greater degree than a much more developed rebellion
in a remote colony. A blow delivered against the power of the
English imperialist bourgeoisie by a rebellion in Ireland is a
hundred times more significant politically than a blow of equal
force delivered in Asia or in Africa.
The French chauvinist press recently reported the
publication
in Belgium of the eightieth issue of an illegal journal, Free
Belgium[2].
Of course, the
chauvinist press of France very often
lies, but this piece of news seems to be true. Whereas chauvinist
and Kautskyite German Social-Democracy has failed to establish a
free press for itself during the two years of war, and has meekly
borne the yoke of military censorship (only the Left Radical
elements, to their credit be it said, have published pamphlets
and manifestos, in spite of the censorship) -- an oppressed
civilised nation has reacted to a military oppression
unparalleled in ferocity by establishing an organ of
revolutionary protest! The dialectics of history are such that
small nations, powerless as an independent factor in the
struggle against imperialism, play a part as one of the ferments,
one of the bacilli, which help the real anti-imperialist
force, the socialist proletariat, to make its appearance on the
scene.
The general staffs in the current war are doing their
utmost
to utilise any national and revolutionary movement in the enemy
camp: the Germans utilise the Irish rebellion, the French -- the
Czech movement, etc. They are acting quite correctly from their
own point of view. A serious war would not be treated seriously
if advantage were not taken of the enemy's slightest weakness and
if every opportunity that presented itself were not seized upon,
the more so since it is impossible to know beforehand at what
moment, where, and with what force some powder magazine will
"explode." We would be very poor revolutionaries if, in the
proletariat's great war of liberation for socialism, we did not
know how to utilise every popular movement against every
single disaster imperialism brings in order to intensify and
extend the crisis. If we were, on the one hand, to repeat in a
thousand keys the declaration that we are "opposed" to all
national oppression and, on the other, to describe the heroic
revolt of the most mobile and enlightened section of certain
classes in an oppressed nation against its oppressors as a
"putsch," we should be sinking to the same level of stupidity as
the Kautskyites.
It is the misfortune of the Irish that they rose
prematurely,
before the European revolt of the proletariat had had
time to mature. Capitalism is not so harmoniously built that
the various sources of rebellion can immediately merge of their
own accord, without reverses and defeats. On the other hand, the
very fact that revolts do break out at different times, in
different places, and are of different kinds, guarantees wide
scope and depth to the general movement; but it is only in
premature, individual, sporadic and therefore unsuccessful,
revolutionary movements that the masses gain experience, acquire
knowledge, gather strength, and get to know their real leaders,
the socialist proletarians, and in this way prepare for the
general onslaught, just as certain strikes, demonstrations, local
and national, mutinies in the army, outbreaks among the
peasantry, etc., prepared the way for the general onslaught in
1905.
Notes
1. Rech (Speech): A
daily,
the Central Organ of
the
Cadet Party published in Petersburg from February 1906; closed
down by the Petrograd Soviet's Revolutionary Military Committee
on October 26 (November 8) 1917; publication continued under
another title until August 1918.
2. Libre Belgium (Free
Belgium) -- an illegal
journal of
the Belgian Labour Party, Brussels (1915-18)
PREVIOUS
ISSUES | HOME
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|