The
Only Hope of Ireland, by Alexander Berkman
First published in The Blast! 15th May, 1916
Most Irishmen, in and out of Ireland, seem unanimous in condemning
the brutality of the British government toward the leaders of the unsuccessful
revolt.
There is no need to recite here the atrocious measures of repression
practiced by England toward her subject races. The arrogant and irresponsible
tyranny of the British government in this relation is a matter of
history. The point of interest just now is, what did the Irish people,
or at
least the Sinn Feiners, expect England to do in the given circumstances?
I am not interested in the weak-kneed editors of Irish-American
papers who bemoan, with all due decorum, Great Britain's
'lack of generosity' in
dealing with the captured Sinn Feiners, or who hide their cowardice
by arguments about the 'mistake' the British government
has committed by its harsh methods.
It is disgusting to hear such rot. As a matter of fact, it is entirely
in keeping with the character and traditions of the British government
to show no quarter to rebels. Those familiar with the colonial
history of Great Britain know that the English government and its
representatives
have systematically practised the most heinous brutality and repression
to stifle the least sign of discontent, in Ireland, in India, Egypt,
South Africa – wherever British rapacity found a source of aggrandizement.
Burning villages, destroying whole districts, shooting rebels by
the wholesale, aye, even resorting to the most inhuman torture
of suspects,
as in the Southwestern Punjab and other parts of India--these have
always been the methods of the British government.
'The measures taken by us', said Sir Michael O'Dwyer, Governor
of the province of Punjab, in his Budget speech in the Punjab Legislative
Council, April 22, 1915, 'have proven that the arm of the Sirkar
(British government) is long enough to reach and strong enough
to strike those who defy the law.' The nature of this 'long and strong
arm' is clearly characterized by Lord James Bryce:
'The English
govern India on absolute principles. There is in British India
no room for popular initiative or popular interference with
the acts of the rulers, from the Viceroy down to the district official.
Society in India is not an ordinary civil society. It is a military
society, military first and foremost. The traveler feels himself,
except perhaps in Bombay, surrounded by an atmosphere of gunpowder all the
time he stays in India.'
The Irish rebels
and their sympathizers know all this. But what they don't know,
or refuse to admit, is that these methods
of suppressing discontent are not merely colonial policy.
They have
also been
practiced
by the English government at home, against its native sons,
the English workers. Just now the iron hand of conscription
is driving
thousands
of Great Britain's toilers into involuntary military servitude.
Long terms of imprisonment are meted out to everyone having
conscientious scruples against murder, to every anti-militarist
protestant,
and many have been driven to suicide rather than turn murderers
of
their
fellowmen.
The Irish people, like everyone else, ought to know that
the claim of the English government of 'protecting weaker
nations and fighting for democracy' is the most disgusting
hypocrisy ever dished up to a muttonhead public. Nor is the British
government in this
respect
any better or worse than the governments of Kaiser, Czar
or President. Government is but the shadow the ruling class of
a country casts
upon the political life of a given nation. And the priests
of Mammon are
always the ruling class, whatever the temporary label of
the exploiters of the people.
We don't fool anyone by paroting that it was 'a mistake' on
the part of the British government to use the sternest methods
against
the Sinn
Fein leaders. It was not a mistake. To the English
government, to any government, the only safe rebel
is a dead rebel.
The ruthless shooting down of the insurrection leaders, the barbourous
execution
of James Connolly, who was severely wounded in the Dublin
fighting
and had to be propped with pillows that the soldiers could
take good
aim at him – all this may serve to embitter the Irish people.
But unless that bitterness express itself in action, in reprisals
– individual or collective – against the British government,
the latter
will have no cause to regret its severity. It is dangerous
to let
rebels live,
If the Irish at home have no more spirit than the Irish in
America, the English government has nothing to fear. The
Irish-Americans are easily the most powerful influence in American
political
life. What
have these Irish-Americans done to stop the atrocities of
Great Britain? They have held mass meetings here and there to 'protest'
against the
continuing executions of Sinn Feiners. They have sufficient
political
power in the country to cause President Wilson to call a
halt
to British atrocities, to force the English government to
treat the
Sinn Feiners
as prisoners of war, which they are. But the Irish-American
priests of Church and State would not dream of such drastic
measures:
politicians don't do that.
More effective yet it would have been if some member or members
of the numerous Irish societies had captured a few representatives
of
the British government in this country as hostages for the
Irish rebels awaiting execution. A British Consul ornamenting
a lamppost
in San
Francisco or New York would quickly secure the respectful attention
of the British lion. The British Ambassador, in the hands of
Washington Irishmen, would more effectively petition his Majesty,
King Edward,
for the lives of the Irish rebel leaders than all the resolutions
passed at mass meetings.
After all, it is the Redmonds and the Carsons who are chiefly
responsible for the failure of the rebellion in Ireland. They
were the first
to condemn the 'rash step' of a people for centuries enslaved
and oppressed
to the verge of utter poverty and degradation. Thus they in
the very beginning alienated the support that the uprising
might
have received
in and out of Ireland. It was this treacherous and cowardly
attitude of the Irish home rule politicians that encouraged
the English
government to use the most drastic measures in suppressing
the revolt.
May outraged Ireland soon learn that its official leaders are
like unto all labor politicians: the lackeys of the rulers,
and the
very first to cry Crucify!
The hope of Ireland lies not in home rule, nor its leaders.
It is not circumscribed by the boundaries of the Emerald
Isle. The
precious blood
shed in the unsuccessful revolution will not have been in
vain if the tears of their great tragedy will clarify the vision
of the sons ad
daughters of Erin and make them see beyond the empty shell
of national aspirations toward the rising sun of the international
brotherhood
of the exploited in all countries and climes combined in
a solidaric
struggle for emancipation from every form of slavery, political
and economic.
Back to Revolution & Civil War
|
|