|
Our overview of Connolly
James Connolly is the pre-eminent leader of Irish socialism, claimed
by virtually everyone on the Irish left, all strands of Irish nationalists
and Republicans and even commemorated by the Irish state on the anniversary
of his execution. What did he stand for? We've gathered together a
number of articles which we hope will shed some light on this. From
our perspective, Connolly's Marxism is flawed on a number of levels
which we will outline briefly below. Having said this, it is important
to keep in mind the period in which he was writing. What would
history have said if Lenin had been executed prior to his April
Theses?
What would history have said of Trotsky prior to his joining the Bolsheviks
in 1917?
Truncated Marxism
Connolly's Marxism was flawed at source from the experience he gained in Britain
and in the USA. Bear in mind that at the time of his death, only a limited selection
of Marx and Engels' writings were available in English (and these were concentrated
on economics),
and
Connolly
spoke
no
German.
Religion
Connolly remained a Catholic. While his politics betrayed no sectarianism and
he always fought against the power of the Catholic Church, he had an essentially
neutral attitude to religious belief. Was this because he was in an overwhelmingly
Catholic country and it was purely tactical? Contrast his attitude to the Catholic
Church with that of Rosa Luxemburg towards her native Poland.
Revolutionary Party
Connolly never understood the Leninist concept of a revolutionary party.
Indeed, his position on this matter was also flawed in comparison to
that of the Second
International. Contrast the behaviour of Connolly in 1916 with that of Lenin
when his safety was threatened by reaction in the summer of 1917. Because
of Lenin's understanding of the need for revolutionary leadership and his own
unique role in that leadership, Lenin's reaction was to seek safety rather than
risk the revolution. Ask yourself: what revolutionary organisation did Connolly
leave behind to fight for the working class?
Permanent Revolution
Did Connolly develop his own concept of permanent revolution in parallel with
that of Trotsky? We would contend that this isn't the case. Connolly had a rather
romanticised and un-Marxist view of Ireland prior to the Anglo-Norman invasion.
He was of the belief that Ireland was in a stage of primitive communism. Feudalism
and Capitalism were foreign impositions on Ireland and because of the under-developed
nature of Ireland's internal market, the prospects for the development of capitalism
were discounted. This is what led Connolly to a position which is sometimes confused
with Trotsky's rigorous analysis.
Revolutionary Defeatism
While Connolly was one of the few leaders of the Second International who didn't
betray the workers' movement in 1914 at the commencement of World War One, he
never developed Lenin's position of revolutionary defeatiem. His position was
for the victory of Germany over Britain as the lesser of two evils for the peoples
of Britain's colonies.
Finally, here are some recommendations for further reading on Connolly:
Kieran Allen, The Politics of James Connolly, Pluto Press,
1990.
W.K. Anderson, James Connolly and the Irish Left, Irish Academic
Press, 1994
Andy Johnston, James Larragy & Edward McWilliams, Connolly: A Marxist
Analysis,
Irish Workers Group, 1990
Back
to Connolly
|
|
