Politics from the Prisons and other Articles about Ireland
| Date: | 1988 |
|---|---|
| Organisation: | Workers Revolutionary Party (Workers' Press) |
| Collection: | The British Left on Ireland |
| View: | View Document |
| Discuss: | Comments on this document |
| Subjects: |
Please note: The Irish Left Archive is provided as a non-commercial historical resource, open to all, and has reproduced this document as an accessible digital reference. Copyright remains with its original authors. If used on other sites, we would appreciate a link back and reference to The Irish Left Archive, in addition to the original creators. For re-publication, commercial, or other uses, please contact the original owners. If documents provided to The Irish Left Archive have been created for or added to other online archives, please inform us so sources can be credited.
Commentary From The Cedar Lounge Revolution
4th May 2009
An interesting document from the UK based Workers’ Revolutionary Party - and typical of a category of pamphlet published by UK left organisations on Ireland that the Archive will be uploading many more of in the course of the year. This takes a strongly pro-Sinn Féin and IRA viewpoint and seeks, through articles such as “Class Struggle and national struggle”, to position it within a Marxist framework.
The Workers Revolutionary Party , founded by Gerry Healy, has to be one of the most interesting British Trotskyist groupings with a remarkably contentious history. Let’s just say that by the time this document was published that history had brought it to a point where there were two competing versions of the WRP, the WRP (Newsline) which remained centred on Healy and the WRP (Workers Press), the latter being the originator of this document.
Anyhow, whatever its provenance, the introductory piece lauds:
Questions of History written by Irish Republican Prisoners of War and published by the Sinn Féin Education Department… [as] an exceptional book. If previously we thought of self-sacrifice and defiant courage as the prisoners great strengths, now we must add another: they are making a vital contribution to political discussion.
This seeks to set the book within a clearly ideological framework, which is much to the liking of the WRP.
Trotskyism and nationalism are dealt with in an article that notes that Trotsky himself ‘criticised the [1916] Rising’ and continues that ‘Subsequently Trotskyists today play down the importance of the question of national liberation of the working class’. It continues to bring these seeming contradictions with the stance of the WRP to a conclusion which for good measure notes that…
At the same time Stalinist parties - be it the British CP or Communist Campaign Group, or the CP of Ireland - are condemning of ‘terrorism’ ever more loudly. On the present anti-IRA witch hunt - where the issue of defending national struggles comes up concretely - they are with imperialism. As for the Stalinist Workers’ Party, they have long ago accepted partition lock, stock and barrel. It is these people, not Trotskyists who turn their backs on Ireland’s right to self-determination.
Indeed this approach is carried into other pieces, such as “Stand firm against anti-IRA witch-hunt”, written in the aftermath of the Enniskillen bombing which notes that “First off the mark to denounce the IRA, before any of the details were known, was the Soviet news agency, TASS”. Although this isn’t restricted to “Stalinists”… “The “Militant” tendency stands for a similar ‘unity’ - within the confines of the six-county state created by British imperialism, and at the expense of any principled defence of those in military conflict with that state.”
And the central line is expressed as follows:
Revolutionaries must support all struggles taken up by all sections of the working class in pursuit of their class interests. But if backward sections of the protestant working class are drawn in behind the loyalist pogroms against catholics, we must support those who physically oppose them. (In other words, if a protestant worker on a picket line attacks a policeman in the course of picketing, we support him; if a protestant worker attacks the same policeman because he is resisting a loyalist pogrom in the name of bourgeois justice and the Anglo-Irish Agreement, we support catholic workers’ right to defend themselves, and ridicule any illusions that there is anything spontaneously “progressive” about the attack on the policeman).
There’s considerably more to this document than that, but it gives a flavour of it and a sense of the analysis used.
This text and these files are a resource for use freely by anyone who wants to for whatever purpose - that’s the whole point of the Archive (well that and the discussions). But if you do happen to use them we’d really appreciate if you mentioned that you found them at the Irish Left Online Document Archive…
Comments
No Comments yet.
Add a Comment
Comments can be formatted in Markdown format . Use the toolbar to apply the correct syntax to your comment. The basic formats are:
**Bold text**
Bold text
_Italic text_
Italic text
[A link](http://www.example.com)
A link
You can join this discussion on The Cedar Lounge Revolution
By: WorldbyStorm Mon, 04 May 2009 18:00:01
Yep, that dynamic of the individuals leading groups getting messiah like complexes is amazing – and in left parties too!
Interesting that that should be the issue you had to break on.
MarkP, okay that definitely makes sense. Discos! Great. In a way though that’s not the worst way to organise… but.. but…
Reply on the CLR
By: Omar Little Mon, 04 May 2009 21:40:49
I had often heard that they did the best of the Trot groups from the CP’s crisis after Hungary. Peter Freyer’s little book mentioned above had a big effect. Brian Behan was the Behan brother, who joined the SLL, author of ‘With Breast Expanded.’ Like all the Behans a bullshit artist of the highest order, if entertaining.
The Healyites had a presence in Waterford, a couple of whom are still leading union activists in the town.
Reply on the CLR
By: CL Mon, 04 May 2009 22:14:21
Brian Behan led the South Bank strike against McAlpine in 1958. A great agitator but not much of a writer. He had been ‘elevated’ as a grass-roots representative to the executive of the CPGB. He recalls in the book how as he walked down a hallway in the Kremlin he saw a short little guy coming towards him, with a shorter guy trotting along behind him: the first was Stalin followed by Kruschev.
During the strike Healy held court in a cafe across the street and Brendan Behan came by with bottles of stout to boost morale.
Here’s a link to a piece by Jim Higgins with much insight into the Healyite phenomenon.
http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/critiques/locust/intro.htm
Reply on the CLR
By: CL Mon, 04 May 2009 22:26:14
Brian Behan “was a fearless and powerful orator at mass meetings and enough of a firebrand to push protests and go-slows to their legal limits and beyond – going to prison twice, in 1950 and 1959. He became a Communist, but found his beliefs gradually crumbling after visits to Russia and China in the mid-1950s, and they collapsed altogether after the Soviets crushed the Hungarian uprising in 1956. However, he remained a man of the left all his life.”-from the obit.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/brian-behan-603433.html
Reply on the CLR
By: WorldbyStorm Mon, 04 May 2009 22:30:33
Thanks for the links CL. Omar, Waterford you say. Intriguing how it’s always been so radicalised, at least in part.
Reply on the CLR
By: PJ Callan Tue, 05 May 2009 10:42:59
Does anyone remember Newsline been sold outside the gate of TCD. (the gate opposite the cigar shop) I remember buying it sometime around the early 90’s on my irregualr trips to Atha Cliath
Reply on the CLR
By: D. J. P. O'Kane Tue, 05 May 2009 11:16:43
I do remember one of their splinter groups (International Communist Party, I think) doing a stall outside the Bank of Ireland/Grattan’s Parliament circa 1994. The paper they were selling was called International Worker.
Reply on the CLR
By: Fergus D Tue, 05 May 2009 13:03:09
My experience of the WRP was in the early 70’s in the UK. At that time Workers Press was a colour daily paper! Must have been one of the first colour papers of any kind in the UK. rumour had it the money was from Gadaffi, but could juts have been the Redgraves and other film types. It did have a lot of articvles about the Middle East though.
I remember once as I walked into the student union (yeah I was a hairy leftie) two WP ppaer sellers, standing either side of the door asked me if I wanted a copy. I read it fairly often but didn’t want a copy every day (or even week), so I said no. To which one replied “So you support the Tories then!” What! Quite a leap but typical. If you didn’t support the WRP you were probably a facist. Hard to get them to actually discuss stuff – all polemics. Their formal Trotskyism was weird . You could say -“right slogan, wrong time” – which of course makes it the wrong slogan. “General strike, force the Tories to resign, elect a Labout Government committed to socialist policies!” day in day out, regardless of the situation.
More on topic – did anyone on the left get “Ireland” right in those days, or even now? As someone from an Irish background growing up the UK I didn’t see any left group/party which seemed to have any great insight in the 70-80s.
Reply on the CLR
By: WorldbyStorm Tue, 05 May 2009 15:55:24
Fergus D, thanks, that’s pretty illuminating, particularly your point about ‘their formal Trotskyism being weird’… to me they seem oddly similar to Maoist strands, not on programmatic grounds but in tone.
That’s a great question you ask. I don’t have an answer myself. Does anyone else?
DJP and PJ. That rings a bell about outside Trinity.
Reply on the CLR
By: Fergus D Tue, 05 May 2009 16:03:00
WorldbyStorm “to me they seem oddly similar to Maoist strands, not on programmatic grounds but in tone” – yes I can see that, especially to the weirder groups like the CPE etc.
Actually there may a connection. I was told, but I am not sure how true it is, that Healy left the CP when they went from the ultra-left third period to popular frontism (Wikipedia claims he left the CP in 1937, which might fit). So maybe he was actually stuck in a form of Stalinism that was similar to Maoism, but dressed in the clothes of Trotsky’s Transitional Programme, applied in inappropriate ultra leftist ways (of course we all have our ideas on what constitutes ultra leftism!).
Reply on the CLR
By: WorldbyStorm Tue, 05 May 2009 16:09:22
I know what you mean 🙂 But that does sort of make sense. Doesn’t it? It just struck me how vivid the language was and how deep the antagonism to rival groups. I mean, of course that goes with the territory of left politics, but… it just seems a bit more heated. I presume it was a bit less so at the height of its powers?
Reply on the CLR
By: Red Mole and John Lennon « The Cedar Lounge Revolution Tue, 05 May 2009 16:12:25
[…] 2009 Posted by WorldbyStorm in British Politics, The Left, Workers Revolutionary Party. trackback Speaking about the Workers Revolutionary Party, Leveller on the Liffey has sent this in, a photograph of John Lennon with Red Mole… (for […]
Reply on the CLR
By: Mick Hall Thu, 07 May 2009 15:21:31
I am away and have only just read this thread, but I thought I would comment all the same as I have some experience of the SLL. I would love to know who recruited Gerry Healy to Trotskyism, for he was a very interesting man, far more than the randy old goat of a demigod he is portrayed as today. He was a man of the 1930s whom by the late 1960s when I first came across him, looked out of sync with the times. He was a great platform speaker who built his speech to a crescendo, but it appeared to me to be so dated.
As Jim has already posted he had some able people around him, you could not join the SLL, you were asked to be a candidate member and it was then decided by the branch whether you were later offered full membership. Many comrades took gaining a party card very seriously. I am sorry to see that éirígí operate this system, its weakness is it gives the leadership far to much power over who gets to be a member , etc.
The SLL used all the usual arguments for operating this system, then flip flopped without an explanation when the WRP was formed and party members were told to go out and literally hover up any Tom Dick or Harriet.
I never regretted my membership of the SLL and I am grateful to the comrades who taught me as a working class teenager to be proud of my class, that we had major achievements to our name, {none of which I had ever been taught about at school etc), and an understanding that internationalism is at the core of socialism and it is impossible to be one without the other. We also studied marxism, revolutionary theory and history, it was not that deep but what it did for me at least was create a thirst for such knowledge
Nevertheless, I soon realized the comrades were running themselves raged with activities that were totally divorced from working class struggles that people like me and mine were engaged in.
I remember attending a trade union aggregate at which Mike Banda asked the comrades who were present what they discussed at their last TU branch meeting, out of about 20 people only two of us gave a report back, Banda then asked when the other comrades last attended a branch meeting, none replied, I wondered what the fuck they were doing there and more to the point what was I.
I also remember ferocious arguments taking place after the Provos bombed the old Bailey. The middle class comrades were all over the place, either condemning the Provos or saying it was our duty to support them as they were workers in struggle. To me this was plain daft and I used the argument already given above about protestant workers committing sectarian acts, or those workers who joined the nazi party and believed that parties socialist crap, should we have supported them. In truth I do believe at that time the SLL leadership understood much more about Ireland than the rest of the UK left.
around this time I read Connolly and Mellows and concluded there were sound reasons to support the Provos, but expecting English workers to be grateful when the Provos bombed London or act supportively was plain daft and never entered my head and still does not. Sadly to my mind the Provos sacrificed the support of the English WC for an Irish newspaper headline and the comforting feeling of revenge, which in reality made it an impossibility to build a mass solidarity movement within England Scotland and Wales.
In my judgment English workers, many of whom had Irish links supported re-reunification, but they saw no reason why in the process they should sacrifice themselves to provo bombs.
Jim’s rule of thumb is spot on, (see comment 13) and for me sums up perfectly why the Trotskyist left, despite the enormous dedication of its cadres, have failed to move beyond the phone box mentality.
Having said that, I would not wish my worst enemy to be governed by the likes of Tony Cliff, Ted Grant or Gerry Healy. I often wonder if the failings of the UK Trotskyist movement could be because not one of its founders understood the working classes in the country they operated in politically, all having been born elsewhere.
But that is another barrel of worms to be argued over.
Reply on the CLR
By: Fergus D Thu, 07 May 2009 15:52:34
Mick Hall “Jim’s rule of thumb is spot on, (see comment 13) and for me sums up perfectly why the Trotskyist left, despite the enormous dedication of its cadres, have failed to move beyond the phone box mentality.”
True. And it came out in the way they operated in arenas such as the UK Labour Party and various campaigns. They didn’t discuss or debate – they shouted at you. Those of us “who had been around” (increasinlgy large number who had been through at least one group) could identify the source of an “interventaion” within the first sentence. Speakers who were members of a group(let) would propound the “party line” and pretty much leave it at that, with some denunciation of the “leadership” of the LP or whatever. They just couldn’t seem to really engage in debate, discussion and development of ideas.
Actually, in the unios I think they operated mostly just as “militants” and didn’t raise “political issues” much at all.
I’ve kept away from such groups for a long time for such reasons. Has it changed?
Not impressed by the UK left’s approach to Northern Ireland at all. Difficult and complex subject but I couldn’t find much that was attractive anywhere.
Reply on the CLR
By: Jim Monaghan Thu, 07 May 2009 16:05:20
http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages/Healy/
The above has a bio of the infamous Healy by Bob Pitt. I don’t buy in to all of Pitts politics but he is right on the facts.
Gerry Downing, I think an Irish Trotskyist has some material as well.
http://www.scribd.com/people/documents/1544314-gerald-j-downing
I think What Next is an excellent journal. A bit ecletric but always intersting even when I disagree.
Look for the debate between ranor Lysaght and John Sullivan on Connolly.
Healy last major campaign was to accuse the leadership of the American SWP of being KGB agents. I think he sated they wre also on the payroll of the FBI. Doublejobbing as well.
He spent part of World War Two in Ireland when the RCP (the main Trotskyist group) feared they would be banned. They hung around with Paddy Trench and wrote for the Dublin Labour Party journal THE TORCH.
Shhehy Skeffigton was friendly to them.
Oh
Healy was in the end a thug and a bully.
Whatever you can say about Grant he was not that. In my opinion boring without originality.
Cliff, again not a Healy and interesting. I would disagree with him but he was not nasty.
The SLL/WRP burnt 1000s of potential cadre and left little of any real worth.
There is an awful story of where the money came from and the price that was paid.
As regards any campaiging work in the neighbouring island give me the British SWP and the IMG any day over Healy and his ilk. From trade union soilidarity to Ireland.I have alwys found the Militant of Grant anemic.
TheLambertistes are the same in France building parties and fronts with only themselves. Here the LCR and its project the NPA offers hope of a breakthrough.
Reply on the CLR
By: Mick Hall Thu, 07 May 2009 19:02:25
Jim,
I presume the story is about Saddam.s intelligence agencies in London and the Iraqi CP, etc, if true and I have no knowledge about its veracity, it is as you say dreadful. As to was the Joe Hansen CIA/KGB nonsense. The Workers Press/Newsline was edited I think at the time by a former World in Action journalist Alex Mitchell, who really was a cut above the average, yet day after day it churned out articles about this CIA/KGB plot.
Although in the papers defense I will say its coverage of the Israeli siege of Beruit and the massacres at the Palestinian camps of Sabra and Shatila were second to none, as was its overall coverage of the PLO.
Reply on the CLR
By: WorldbyStorm Thu, 07 May 2009 19:13:05
Can I thank you all for contributing to this thread. It’s precisely the sort of discussion I’d hoped for when posting up the WRP material, both insightful and cordial (or if people prefer, comradely). It really gives an insight into the times – and how some things have changed and others haven’t.
Reply on the CLR
By: Neues aus den Archiven der radikalen Linken « Entdinglichung Fri, 15 May 2009 13:31:54
[…] Nicky Kelly News (vermutlich 1983) * Workers’ Revolutionary Party (WRP): Politics from the Prisons and other Articles about Ireland […]
Reply on the CLR
By: Left Archive: “James Connolly and the struggle for Marxism in Ireland” – Article from The Labour Review, monthly journal of the Workers Revolutionary Party (UK) c.1981 « The Cedar Lounge Revolution Mon, 22 Nov 2010 07:41:17
[…] Left Archive already has a piece of documentation from the WRP itself and the WRP linked Workers League and an interesting analysis critiquing the involvement of the […]
Reply on the CLR
By: Left Archive: “Torture Casebook – The Ulster Dossier, Socialist Labour League [later Workers Revolutionary Party], October 1971. « The Cedar Lounge Revolution Mon, 26 Mar 2012 02:24:05
[…] Left Archive already has a piece of documentation from the WRP itself and the WRP linked Workers League and an interesting analysis critiquing the involvement of the […]
Reply on the CLR