sp on connolly?

national | miscellaneous | news report Monday August 26, 2002 16:00 by jc

Connolly spends a lot of time discussing the Irish `race'

Well, time for the voice of dissent. As one who would not lift a finger to save his country, I think that Connolly has wrought irreparable harm to the World Workers' movement. In the first case, he basically subordinates his Socialism to his nationalism, thus we find phrases like:

This linking together of our national aspirations with the hopes of the men and women who have raised the standard of revolt against that
system of capitalism and landlordism, of which the British Empire is the most aggressive type and resolute defender, should not, in any
sense, import an element of discord into the ranks of earnest nationalists, and would serve to place us in touch with fresh reservoirs of moral and physical strength sufficient to lift the
cause of Ireland to a more commanding position than it has occupied since the day of Benburb.
(Socialism & Nationalism, ttp://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1897/01/socnat.htm)

True patriotism seeks the welfare of each in the happiness of all, and is inconsistent with the selfish desire for worldly wealth which
can only be gained by the spoliation of less favoured fellow-mortals.
It is the mission of the working class to give to patriotism this higher, nobler, significance. This can only be done by our working
class, as the only universal, all-embracing class, organizing as a distinct political party, recognizing in Labour the cornerstone of
our economic edifice and the animating principle of our political action.
(Patriotism & Labour,
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1897/08/patlabr.htm)

Basically, then, he sees patriotism first, and then finds it confirmed in the working class. Much the same was true of Hyndman &
Quelch who figured themselves as the true patriots against the false patriotism of capital (this lead to their anti-Semitic attacks during
the Boer war, which Connolly attacked them for vehemently – lest anyone think I'm playing a tarry brush).

the following shows a distinctly dodgy line, similar to the Norman yoke argument of English bourgeois revolutionaries:

As Socialists we are not imbued with national or racial hatred by the remembrance that the political and social order under which we live
was imposed on our fathers at the point of the sword; that during 700 years Ireland has resisted this unjust foreign domination; that famine, pestilence and bad government have made this western isle almost a desert and scattered our exiled fellow-countrymen over the whole face of the globe. (Socialism & Irish Nationalism,
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1897/xx/scirenat.htm)

From the same, we see that his internationalism conceives itself in the form of eternal and equal nations:

In that there is not a trace of chauvinism. We desire to preserve with the English people the same political relations as with the people of France, or Germany, or of any other country; the greatest possible friendship, but also the strictest independence.
(ibid).

That is, he conceived nations as eternal units of property, which would continue to exist in socialism. As someone who wants to abolish all nations, I consider him thus an enemy. As here, his definition of a `Free Nation'

What is a free nation? A free nation is one which possesses absolute control over all its own internal resources and powers, and which has
no restriction upon its intercourse with all other nations similarly circumstanced except the restrictions placed upon it by nature…A free
nation must have complete control over its own harbours, to open them or close them at will, or shut out any commodity, or allow it to enter in, just as it seemed best to suit the well-being of its own people, and in obedience to their wishes, and entirely free of the interference of any other nation, and in complete disregard of the
wishes of any other nation…A free nation must have full power to nurse industries to health, either by government encouragement or by
government prohibition of the sale of goods of foreign rivals. It may be foolish to do either, but a nation is not free unless it has that
power, as all free nations in the world have today.
(What is a free nation,
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1916/02/whtfrnat.htm).

So, that is, we will have commodities and competition among nations (comprising of mysterious `races', whatever they are, Connolly spends a lot of time discussing the Irish `race'). And of course, the socialism will only applies to the members of the specific `races'

Thus we find him fulminating:

Ireland's rich natural resources, and the kindly genius of its children, are not to be allowed to combine for the satisfaction of Irish wants,
(Ibid).

Culminating in this nonsense:

As the separate individual is to the family, so the separate nation is to humanity. The perfect family is that which best draws out the
inner powers of the individual, the most perfect world is that in which the separate existence of nations is held most sacred.
(Ibid).

A part of the reification of Ireland, which unlike Belgium, is not a construct of statesmen, apparently.

This course lead him ultimately to a mystic position on nationalism:

…there still remains in Ireland a spot where a body of true men and women are ready to hoist, gather round, and to defend the flag made
sacred by all the sufferings of all the martyrs of the past.
(The Irish Flag,
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1916/04/irshflag.htm)

We are out for Ireland for the Irish. But who are the Irish? Not the rack-renting, slum-owning landlord; not the sweating, profit-grinding
capitalist; not the sleek and oily lawyer; not the prostitute pressman - the hired liars of the enemy. Not these are the Irish upon
whom the future depends. Not these, but the Irish working class, the only secure foundation upon which a free nation can be reared.
(Ibid)
Again, his class politics is subordinated to his nationalist politics.
Nationalism is a `holy' cause, apparently.

A hero, to nationalists only, I'm afraid. Nationalism assumes that distinct areas of teh globe remain *property* of distinct groups of
humans, and retain teh features of commodity relations and markets.
This alignment of nationalism and socialism has seen many wasted hours by leftists, and caused much confusion, please, kill it now...

Bill M. (Socialist Party)