IrishWorker
15th August 2012, 19:16
A Different Departure For Working Class Emancipation:
Over the years many theories have being adopted by various political parties and organisations, many who consider themselves revolutionary Marxist in the political sense, advocating the liberation of the working class from the chains of capitalism. The Irish Republican Socialist Party (IRSP) have tried many approaches to this road using their very appropriate maxim, “for national liberation and socialism” which is as relevant today as it was around the time of the party’s founder Seamus Costello back in 1974. It also runs parallel with the party’s late Thomas (TA) Powers document which states unambiguously
“there can be no national liberation without socialism” and “there can be no socialism without national liberation”
in Ireland. As the working class make up the majority of the population until they liberate themselves from the bondage chains of wage slavery under capitalism, Irish or otherwise, there can be no true national liberation. This would be equally applicable to any other country under occupation in part or whole. Palestine springs to mind. This simple yet thorough analysis applies throughout the 32 counties of Ireland as a single unit and not be mistaken with any one party gaining local governmental power in the six counties, via some kind of assembly, and seeking full state governmental control, through the Dail, in the 26 counties.
There are of course other political parties and organisations, not only in Ireland but across the planet, who also claim to be in pursuit of socialism and a socialist system of government and commerce. The Socialist Workers Party (SWP) who once (and perhaps still do) considered themselves revolutionary Marxists are now, it would appear, trying the parliamentary road towards socialism, a strategy they spent years telling everybody could not work!
“No Parliamentary Road To Socialism” was once their headline but now how things change. It now appears the SWP have re-invented themselves as People Before Profit, a very fitting name, and are attempting to inform the people that the parliamentary road can work. Who knows maybe it can, time may tell. People Before Profit are part of a broad alliance along with the Socialist Party, formerly Militant, styling themselves, along with Seamus Healy (Tipperary Unemployed), the United Left Alliance. The ULA have 5 elected TDs in Dail Eireann.
Sinn Fein (provisional) are also now practising reformist parliamentary politics. They now speak of
“The New Republic” and very little is mentioned of the previously oft spoken “Socialist Republic” as they embark on a completely new departure towards Irish unification. Will it work? Time will tell!, if it does socialism will, it appears, be well down the list of priorities if at all.
What none of these parties and organisations may not have considered is that in pursuit of socialism before political unity can come about what is needed is industrial unity in the workplace. Socialism as a political ideology can not come into being without the participation of the working class, blue and white collared, and certainly can’t exist alongside capitalism. Certainly not for any length of time. These are points which James Connolly recognised a long time ago.
In his pamphlet The Axe To The Root he argues logically that “industrial unity” is paramount to the achievement of political unity. While in the USA he charges that
"The real truth is that workers do not unite industrially but, on the contrary, are most hopelessly divided on the industrial field, and that their division and confusion on the political field are the direct result of their division and confusion on the industrial field. It would be easy to prove that even our most loyal trade unionist habitually play the game of the capitalist class on the industrial field, just as surely as the Republican and Democrat workers do it on the political field".
Connolly was arguing the syndicalist theory of One Big Union as opposed to many smaller ones organised along craft, skilled and unskilled lines. He sets out to provide proof and causes of these divisions. Connolly continues
’Quite recently we had a great strike of the workers employed on the subway and elevated systems of street car services in New York. The men showed a splendid front against the power of the mammoth capitalist company, headed by August Belmont, against which they were arrayed. Conductors, motormen, ticket choppers, platform men, repairers, permanent way men, ticket sellers- all went out together and for a time paralysed the entire traffic on their respective system‘.
‘The company, on the other hand, had the usual recourse to Jim Farley and his scabs, and sought to man the trains with these professional traitors to their class. The number of scabs was large, yet small in proportion to the men on strike yet the strike was broken‘.
‘It was not the scabs, however, who turned the strike against the strikers in favour of the masters. That service to capital was performed by good union men with union cards in their pockets. These men were engineers in the power houses which supplied the electric power to run the cars, and without whom all the scabs combined could not have run a single trip‘.
The above strike briefly described by Connolly is as applicable today as then back in the early part of the 20th century. If we examine the factors which helped the Thatcher government and their agents defeat the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) in the 1984-85 coal miners strike we can see similarities to the situation described by James Connolly. The strike itself was essentially against pit closures and was conducted in line with the NUM rulebook. However there were a large number of scabs, particularly though not exclusively, in the Nottinghamshire area. Similar to the situation described by Connolly
“the number of scabs was large, yet small in proportion to the men on strike”,
unfortunately on this occasion the scabs were card carrying union members. Coupled with the scabs in the coal industry itself the failure of the Dockworkers leaders to bring their members out in which case no imported coal would have been unloaded the miners, after one bitter year went back to work. Without imported coal the scabs could not have produced enough to keep the power stations burning, even though it was a mild winter. However scab labour or none if the pit deputies union, NACODS (National Association of Colliery Overseers, Deputies and Shotfirers), had come out in support of the NUM as their ballot had mandated not a coalmine in the land could have opened, under health and safety a pit deputy must be present down the mine for any production to begin. Therefore “all the scabs combined” could not have dug one nugget of coal. The parallels to Connolly’s example are stark.
The working class in today’s world of post modernity still suffer these divisions in the workplace. For example if say the tellers in the banking and finance industry were out on strike and the employers employed scab labour to do the work of the strikers where would these class traitors be without the security workers opening the premises or, more importantly, delivering cash? Or, equally, if the computer programmers were out on strike in sympathy and the system crashed then what? The same argument applies.
Workers in all industries should organise not on craft, skilled or unskilled lines, not on blue and white collar identities but on class and only class affiliation. They are after all everyone of them working class. The employers organise as a class and have done historically since wage slavery came into being, around 1750.
Once unity is achieved in the workplace, every workplace blue and white collar, public and private sectors then there is a chance of achieving political unity. The working class of the 21st century may find the need for a, or a number of, political parties to run society obsolete. They may find that through One Big Union and democratically elected workers councils that the modern proletariat can run society in an organised democratic, in its full meaning, way.
Production through industry for the needs of the people as opposed to the greed of a handful of them. Syndicalism is the historical name given to this method of replacing capitalist greed with social need. The overthrow of capitalism and the installation of socialism leading to true communism. One Big Union with every worker out on strike obliterating divisions forever.
Of course the bosses would fight back but once the means of production, distribution and exchange are in workers hands and under their control the capitalist class must resort to force, which they would do, to regain their former privileges and positions of control. They could no longer impose pay cuts or threaten people with dismissal because such actions would no longer be their prerogative. The question must be asked how many agents of force, military, police etc would remain loyal to the old regime, the capitalist system? Let us assume that the majority do remain loyal to the present state of affairs, then what? Well use the imagination! If somebody is forcing you at the point of a gun to do something against your will what do you need in order to resist? If this somebody then becomes an army of somebody’s then what is needed?
Perhaps all these would be, or formerly, revolutionary parties and organisations should re-examine their positions. With the enforced revolutionary downfall of the capitalist system of exploitation would a political party, any political party, be needed? On the other hand as all the present parties appear, at least on the surface, to have failed in their quest for revolution and with the means of production, distribution and exchange under working class control could a new political party be born out of the workers councils to work in conjunction with the democratically elected bodies to run national affairs? Magnify this theory to a global level and we see a possible new departure!
http://theredplough.blogspot.co.uk/
Over the years many theories have being adopted by various political parties and organisations, many who consider themselves revolutionary Marxist in the political sense, advocating the liberation of the working class from the chains of capitalism. The Irish Republican Socialist Party (IRSP) have tried many approaches to this road using their very appropriate maxim, “for national liberation and socialism” which is as relevant today as it was around the time of the party’s founder Seamus Costello back in 1974. It also runs parallel with the party’s late Thomas (TA) Powers document which states unambiguously
“there can be no national liberation without socialism” and “there can be no socialism without national liberation”
in Ireland. As the working class make up the majority of the population until they liberate themselves from the bondage chains of wage slavery under capitalism, Irish or otherwise, there can be no true national liberation. This would be equally applicable to any other country under occupation in part or whole. Palestine springs to mind. This simple yet thorough analysis applies throughout the 32 counties of Ireland as a single unit and not be mistaken with any one party gaining local governmental power in the six counties, via some kind of assembly, and seeking full state governmental control, through the Dail, in the 26 counties.
There are of course other political parties and organisations, not only in Ireland but across the planet, who also claim to be in pursuit of socialism and a socialist system of government and commerce. The Socialist Workers Party (SWP) who once (and perhaps still do) considered themselves revolutionary Marxists are now, it would appear, trying the parliamentary road towards socialism, a strategy they spent years telling everybody could not work!
“No Parliamentary Road To Socialism” was once their headline but now how things change. It now appears the SWP have re-invented themselves as People Before Profit, a very fitting name, and are attempting to inform the people that the parliamentary road can work. Who knows maybe it can, time may tell. People Before Profit are part of a broad alliance along with the Socialist Party, formerly Militant, styling themselves, along with Seamus Healy (Tipperary Unemployed), the United Left Alliance. The ULA have 5 elected TDs in Dail Eireann.
Sinn Fein (provisional) are also now practising reformist parliamentary politics. They now speak of
“The New Republic” and very little is mentioned of the previously oft spoken “Socialist Republic” as they embark on a completely new departure towards Irish unification. Will it work? Time will tell!, if it does socialism will, it appears, be well down the list of priorities if at all.
What none of these parties and organisations may not have considered is that in pursuit of socialism before political unity can come about what is needed is industrial unity in the workplace. Socialism as a political ideology can not come into being without the participation of the working class, blue and white collared, and certainly can’t exist alongside capitalism. Certainly not for any length of time. These are points which James Connolly recognised a long time ago.
In his pamphlet The Axe To The Root he argues logically that “industrial unity” is paramount to the achievement of political unity. While in the USA he charges that
"The real truth is that workers do not unite industrially but, on the contrary, are most hopelessly divided on the industrial field, and that their division and confusion on the political field are the direct result of their division and confusion on the industrial field. It would be easy to prove that even our most loyal trade unionist habitually play the game of the capitalist class on the industrial field, just as surely as the Republican and Democrat workers do it on the political field".
Connolly was arguing the syndicalist theory of One Big Union as opposed to many smaller ones organised along craft, skilled and unskilled lines. He sets out to provide proof and causes of these divisions. Connolly continues
’Quite recently we had a great strike of the workers employed on the subway and elevated systems of street car services in New York. The men showed a splendid front against the power of the mammoth capitalist company, headed by August Belmont, against which they were arrayed. Conductors, motormen, ticket choppers, platform men, repairers, permanent way men, ticket sellers- all went out together and for a time paralysed the entire traffic on their respective system‘.
‘The company, on the other hand, had the usual recourse to Jim Farley and his scabs, and sought to man the trains with these professional traitors to their class. The number of scabs was large, yet small in proportion to the men on strike yet the strike was broken‘.
‘It was not the scabs, however, who turned the strike against the strikers in favour of the masters. That service to capital was performed by good union men with union cards in their pockets. These men were engineers in the power houses which supplied the electric power to run the cars, and without whom all the scabs combined could not have run a single trip‘.
The above strike briefly described by Connolly is as applicable today as then back in the early part of the 20th century. If we examine the factors which helped the Thatcher government and their agents defeat the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) in the 1984-85 coal miners strike we can see similarities to the situation described by James Connolly. The strike itself was essentially against pit closures and was conducted in line with the NUM rulebook. However there were a large number of scabs, particularly though not exclusively, in the Nottinghamshire area. Similar to the situation described by Connolly
“the number of scabs was large, yet small in proportion to the men on strike”,
unfortunately on this occasion the scabs were card carrying union members. Coupled with the scabs in the coal industry itself the failure of the Dockworkers leaders to bring their members out in which case no imported coal would have been unloaded the miners, after one bitter year went back to work. Without imported coal the scabs could not have produced enough to keep the power stations burning, even though it was a mild winter. However scab labour or none if the pit deputies union, NACODS (National Association of Colliery Overseers, Deputies and Shotfirers), had come out in support of the NUM as their ballot had mandated not a coalmine in the land could have opened, under health and safety a pit deputy must be present down the mine for any production to begin. Therefore “all the scabs combined” could not have dug one nugget of coal. The parallels to Connolly’s example are stark.
The working class in today’s world of post modernity still suffer these divisions in the workplace. For example if say the tellers in the banking and finance industry were out on strike and the employers employed scab labour to do the work of the strikers where would these class traitors be without the security workers opening the premises or, more importantly, delivering cash? Or, equally, if the computer programmers were out on strike in sympathy and the system crashed then what? The same argument applies.
Workers in all industries should organise not on craft, skilled or unskilled lines, not on blue and white collar identities but on class and only class affiliation. They are after all everyone of them working class. The employers organise as a class and have done historically since wage slavery came into being, around 1750.
Once unity is achieved in the workplace, every workplace blue and white collar, public and private sectors then there is a chance of achieving political unity. The working class of the 21st century may find the need for a, or a number of, political parties to run society obsolete. They may find that through One Big Union and democratically elected workers councils that the modern proletariat can run society in an organised democratic, in its full meaning, way.
Production through industry for the needs of the people as opposed to the greed of a handful of them. Syndicalism is the historical name given to this method of replacing capitalist greed with social need. The overthrow of capitalism and the installation of socialism leading to true communism. One Big Union with every worker out on strike obliterating divisions forever.
Of course the bosses would fight back but once the means of production, distribution and exchange are in workers hands and under their control the capitalist class must resort to force, which they would do, to regain their former privileges and positions of control. They could no longer impose pay cuts or threaten people with dismissal because such actions would no longer be their prerogative. The question must be asked how many agents of force, military, police etc would remain loyal to the old regime, the capitalist system? Let us assume that the majority do remain loyal to the present state of affairs, then what? Well use the imagination! If somebody is forcing you at the point of a gun to do something against your will what do you need in order to resist? If this somebody then becomes an army of somebody’s then what is needed?
Perhaps all these would be, or formerly, revolutionary parties and organisations should re-examine their positions. With the enforced revolutionary downfall of the capitalist system of exploitation would a political party, any political party, be needed? On the other hand as all the present parties appear, at least on the surface, to have failed in their quest for revolution and with the means of production, distribution and exchange under working class control could a new political party be born out of the workers councils to work in conjunction with the democratically elected bodies to run national affairs? Magnify this theory to a global level and we see a possible new departure!
http://theredplough.blogspot.co.uk/