Showing posts with label Marxism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marxism. Show all posts
While the general perception is that Unionism is a Right-wing set of beliefs, political commentator, Dr John Coulter explores the view - what if Unionism was to lurch to the Hard Left ideologically as a way forward into Northern Ireland’s next century?

To mention Unionism and socialism in the same breath seems like the ultimate political anathema, but we must always remember that Irish politics is very much the art of the impossible.

In 1981, if you told the newly-elected republican MP for Fermanagh South Tyrone, Owen Carron, that one day his party Sinn Fein would sit in a partitionist parliament at Stormont with the Rev Ian Paisley’s DUP as its power-sharing Executive partner, you probably would have been met with hysterical laughter. But it happened.

Likewise, in 1985, as that same Rev Paisley had stepped off the platform at Belfast City Hall after delivering his ‘Never, never, never, never’ speech at the massive Ulster Says No rally in the aftermath of the signing of the Anglo-Irish Agreement and you had told him that one day he would enter a power-sharing devolved government at Stormont with former Derry IRA commander Martin McGuinness as his deputy, you probably would have been met with the famous maxim: ‘Let me smell your breath!’. But it happened.

Similarly, after the most recent Dail General Election, if you had told the Leinster House establishment that rivals Fianna Fail and Fine Gael would form an historic coalition government to keep Sinn Fein out of power, you’d probably have been told ‘Aye right!’ But it happened.

In the face of demands for Unionism to become more liberal and progressive and present an avowedly moderate agenda compared to the 1970s Unionist Coalition Hard Right agenda, could an even more radical ideological partnership be conceived - hardline socialism with a defence of the Union?

At first sight, this may seem an impossibility given the past history of Unionism flirting with socialism. The old Northern Ireland Labour Party, which managed to clock up some minor gains against the original Unionist Party, which ran Stormont for more than half a century, is now defunct.

At one time, socialists within the ruling Unionist Party did have their own pressure group - Unionist Labour, but it had little influence against the Right-wing tide of pressure groups such as the Ulster Monday Club, the West Ulster Unionist Council, and even Ulster Vanguard before it became a political party.

Among the Unionist electorate, Left-leaning parties such as the Progressive Unionist Party and the Ulster Democratic Party have had little impact, although the PUP did win two seats in the original Northern Ireland Assembly mandate of 1998.

However, Unionism’s Christian fundamentalist wing dismissed the PUP as ‘the Shankill Soviet’, accusing the party’s hierarchy of openly flirting with Marxism and communism.

This was as a result of the uneasy relationship between working class loyalism and Protestant fundamentalism. The accusation from numerous loyalists was that Protestant evangelists would preach rabble-rousing sermons, resulting in young loyalists acting on them and ending up in jail, whereupon the evangelists would abandon such convicted loyalists as ‘sinners’.

Loyalism began to regard such preaching as a ‘Grand Old Duke of York’ strategy of leading Protestants up to the top of the hill politically - and then promptly abandoning them when a crisis hit.

This was most openly seen during the Troubles when the once DUP-supported Ulster Resistance Movement (of red berets fame!) in the Eighties was cut adrift politically by the party when various weapons scandals emerged.

When jailed loyalists began to question why they were being abandoned by the fundamentalists in Protestantism, the former began to look to other ideologies politically rather than similar theologies.

It was at this point in the conflict that socialism and especially the writings of Marx began to enter the working class loyalist mindset. And so the rift between mainstream Unionism and working class loyalism began under the misconception that it was impossible to be a Unionist and a hardline socialist at the same time, let alone be a Unionist and a Marxist.

This perception was also fuelled by the view that the IRA’s political wing, Sinn Fein, and the INLA’s political wing, the Irish Republican Socialist Party, were both Marxist to the core.

Put bluntly, too - many Marxists who would have sympathised with the class structure politics of the PUP also shared similar views to the Workers’ Party, which had emerged from the Official IRA.

At one time, a movement known as the British and Irish Communist Organisation (BICO) was quite prolific in putting our pamphlets and policy documents within the loyalist community. Some in loyalism even wanted to see a reformation of the old Communist Party of Northern Ireland.

So that’s the background, but what of Unionism in 2021 which finds itself in Northern Ireland’s centenary year as a minority ideology if the past three elections are taken into consideration.

Indeed, if Unionism as a political family cannot combat electorally the so-called ‘Alliance Bounce’ come next May’s expected Stormont General Election, Sinn Fein may well end up being the largest party in the Assembly, entitling it to the post of First Minister.

Whilst the terms ‘progressive liberal’ and ‘radical moderate’ are being kicked around Unionism as it tries to define itself in a post Brexit and post covid island, could the unthinkable become a workable reality - namely, Unionism becomes a Hard Left ideology in terms of social and economic issues, whilst remaining firm on the Union?

After all, the DUP under Paisleyism was seen to be on the Right in terms of the Union, but on the Left in terms of everyday ‘bread and butter constituency issues’.

Unionism may also be hesitant to take a leap to the Hard Left given the demise of Jeremy Corbyn in the British Labour Party and the fact in Dublin’s Leinster House, a major contributing factor in Fianna Fail and Fine Gael forming their historic pact to keep out the ‘Shinners’ was because Sinn Fein’s Marxist economic agenda was ‘pie in the sky’ politics.

However, a viewpoint exists theologically - albeit a minority view - that Jesus Christ was really the first communist when the New Testament Sermon on the Mount is taken into consideration.

It has also been suggested that Karl Marx based communism on Christ’s Beatitudes by simply removing God from the political equation.

As Northern Ireland becomes more secular and pluralist in its society, could Unionism offer a ‘Shared Union’ to the island of Ireland which could adopt a Hard Left interpretation of The Beatitudes, thus keeping the Christian Churches on board electorally.

Summarising The Beatitudes in modern English, they are about Putting People First - putting pupils first, putting patients first, and putting pensioners first.

A ‘Shared Union’ would also emphasise that conditions such as the pandemic, cancer and autism does not recognise borders, or Orange and Green politics.

The bottom line for Unionism is, that in moving forward as an ideology, it may have to consider ideas which previously were perceived as electorally impossible.

In this case, perhaps Unionism as a body politic should move beyond so-called ‘progressive liberalism’ to a position where on everyday issues which affect people’s lives, it adopts a Hard Left approach.

In this scenario, could Unionism pinch a political trick or two from the so-called ‘liberation theology’ which the Catholic Church used as a basis against totalitarian regimes in South America? 

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter
Listen to commentator Dr John Coulter’s programme, Call In Coulter, every Saturday morning around 10.15 am on Belfast’s Christian radio station, Sunshine 1049 FM. Listen online

How’s About A Unionism Which Jumps To The Hard Left?

Lately, I have found myself reading more Marxist literature than I am inclined to. Familiar enough with it from back in the prison day when I was at ease with the Marxist label, post Marx’s own writings, I have read less of Lenin and Trotsky, not finding persuasive answers in the deification of the party. There was more to be mined in Poulantzas, Althusser, Milliband and Gramsci. Once on the right side of the prison wall the Marxist dog tag ended up no longer on my chest but in a chest of dusty drawers.
  
*****

It was not that Marxist ideas ever came to repel me. I have long viewed them as probably the most efficient and insightful model of political economy making explicable the economic system the world labours under. It was the Marxists that I encountered that turned me off and brought to mind Marx’s own comment that had stayed with me from jail days: when socialism is in the hands of the sects and cults there is no longer socialism. In my view Marxism is at core an economic system of thought which political slogans, no matter how loudly or passionately chanted, simply fail to express the essence of.

When asked to review Undoing The Conquest I didn’t relish the task but agreed to do it as a favour for a friend. I didn’t expect it to be as good as Francis Wheen’s uplifting Karl Marx nor did I dread it being as dry as Louis Althusser’s For Marx, both of which I had been reading at the same time.

The short book is the culmination of a series of seminar papers delivered in Dublin in 2012 and commissioned by the Peadar O’Donnell Socialist Republican Forum, a body pulled together by Irish socialists concerned at the economic malaise afflicting the country and determined not to allow the architects of austerity to go unchallenged. Its accessible lay out and structure meant that bite size chunks would make a reading manageable and considerably less daunting than trying to hold on to some difficult to grasp meta-narrative that winded its way through a series of complex concepts.

The book is thematically organised in three sections: democracy, the state and imperialism and from the outset the editors are keen to dispel the conceptual usefulness of ‘betrayal’. They are keen to make the point that the prism of betrayal offers a very opaque view of strategic orientation. Political forces do what they do not because of personal appetite but out of class interest.

‘Betrayal’ is a word often flung around political discourse, there is always somebody backsliding, selling short or behaving treacherously. One of the more significant but less memorable moments in our recent history was when Sinn Fein’s Martin McGuinness accused physical force republicans of betrayal. The irony of what one Sinn Fein member described as ‘company and context’ seemed to escape McGuinness as he made his ‘traitors’ denunciation while standing alongside both the leader of political unionism and the leader of the British police in Ireland. It sort of meant the word could mean anything while at the same time meaning absolutely nothing.

In seeking to devalue the explanatory power of the betrayal concept Gareth Murphy's paper asked the question Who are Ireland’s Ruling Class and in whose Interest does it Rule? In a paper so short I, with a sense of relief, did not anticipate anything as dense or as theoretical as Goran Therborn’s What does the Ruling Class do when it Rules?

He takes the view that feeling 'betrayal' is pointless, concluding that somebody like William Martin Murphy was not guilty of betrayal of his nation when national freedom meant something different to him that it would to a socialist.

To Murphy freedom meant the freedom for him to expand his business empire and grow at the expense of British industries. His was a freedom in relation to the freedom of British business and a freedom to exploit the Irish working class to enrich himself.

That he chose William Martin Murphy rather than a more recent example probably deprives the author’s contention of added ballast and the certain resonance it would have gained. For if this is William Martin Murphy’s nationalism then its spirit very much guided Tom McFeely, whose profit before people ethic was the moving force behind the debacle of Priory Hall which resulted in the great Dublin lock out of residents from their homes.

Gareth Murphy’s contribution contends that the accusation of betrayal is often a misnomer for what is in fact class interest. The Irish national bourgeoisie rather than betraying people is simply being loyal to profit and it would be unwise for socialists to ever expect anything else from it.

Tommy McKearney, one of the moving forces behind the Forum, in his paper The Politics of Class in a Divided Society, warned of the serious limitations of an ultra leftist response to the problems posed by reformism, economism or ‘gas and water’ socialism. McKearney would see this very much as Lenin did those who were waving  ‘little red flags’ while at the same time waiving any serious socialist strategic orientation. His paper called for class to displace community in the North. But he is aware that this objective has eluded every socialist strategist who has yet applied their mind to the matter.

Kevin McCorry in his paper The State: Republicanism and Democracy, claimed that capitalism is a history of wars, and socialism a history of mistakes. Socialism has not been without its wars either or its war criminals and one wonders if a socialist world could ever be war free. Despite the Marxist belief in the ultimate withering away of the state, politics is never going to wither away: and politics always implies conflict. To believe that it will be non-antagonistic conflict is wish being father to the thought. The alarm sounded by Marx that our future will be either socialism or barbarism in itself does not act as a guarantor that socialism itself will not resort to barbarism. The word gulag always conjures up a haunting image of the type of spectre that has stalked the world of socialism.

There are a number of other papers in this book that catch the eye including contributions from Eddie Glacken, Eugene McCartan and Gareth Mackle. None are dull.

In spite of class remaining for Marxists, the defining societal cleavage, the motor force of history without which society will never be understood, nor corrective strategy developed, I have tended to find class more complex than Marxists often make out. Recalling the focus of both Erik Olin Wright and Nicos Poulantzas the binary classification employed always seemed a truism that did little to inform serious socialist strategy. As economic categories there is capital, and there is labour but, as Poulantzas suggested, to read politics off from this like some registration plate on a car is strategically dubious. In response to Engels’ insistence that the economy only determines the political structure in the last instance Althusser maintained that ‘from the first moment to the last, the lonely hour of the “last instance” never comes.'  A Marxist politics not shackled by economic reductionism which at the same time is mindful of Ellen Meiksins Wood’s rejoinder to those who would Retreat From Class, is a project to which more Marxist time should be afforded. 

Critics might take the view that the collection of essays is standard fare for old style Marxism and that there is no serious advance on what passed for Marxist thinking within the Irish radical left in the '70s and '80s. While there is nothing of a serious strategic nature that leaps out from its 89 pages, this would be to ignore what its purpose is. This book makes no grand claim to be a socialist blueprint. It is basic, pretends to be nothing else and is pitched at familiarising people with ideas at their first point of contact. In some ways it has a feel of socialism for beginners, outlining and breaking down key ideas in some instances through case studies as with Eddie Molloy’s paper on the North of Ireland. Rather than presenting initiates with the tablets of stone, it aims to get people talking in Marxist language which in turn might act as a discursive gateway leading to a more analytical engagement with Marxist ideas.

The Peadar O’Donnell Socialist Republican Forum, 2013. Undoing The Conquest: Renewing the Struggle. www.socialistrepublicanforum.wordpress.com

forumodonnell@gmail.co

Undoing The Conquest