LITTLE RED LI9RE™

'Jim' Connollyand

Irish FreedomBy G. Schiiller

TEN CENTS

No.

11

PUBLISHING OOMOAJMVHIS W. WACMINGTOM ST. CMICXVOO ILL.

LITTLE RED LIBRAR*Y No. 11

'Jim' Connollyand

The Irish Rising of 1916

By G. Schiiller

PRICE 10 CENTS.

Published by

DAILYHONKER.PUBLISHINGCOMPANY*

CHICAGO I

Introduction.

When James Connolly, Marxian socialist and Corn-mander-in-Ghief of the Irish revolutionary army of EasterWeek, 1916, was awaiting his doom at the hands of aBritish firing squad, his last words spoken to his daugh-ter Nora, expressed a fear that his comrades in the so-cialist movement would not understand this action. Andfew of them did. British socialists in particular, not allof them tho, regarded Connolly's heroic act a;3 a national-ist gesture, not having any relation whatever to the classstruggle. That Connolly was a revolutionist of the newtype, a man who knew all the weak spots in the imperial-ist structure and also knew how to mobilize all the anti-imperialist forces against the enemy, is proven by Com-rade Schoiller in his excellent article to which those fewwords are an introduction.

James Connolly wajs born of proletarian parents inthe northern part of Ireland. He was obliged to go towork for a boss at an early age. In fact, he had to liealbout his age in order to evade the law regarding childlaibor. Early in his life he became interested in the so-cialist movement and agitated in Scotland, England andIreland, before his first visit to the United States fora speaking tour.

Tho extremely active in the American working classmovement, despite the mental agony he suffered owingto the distress of his family, thru poverty, Connollynever lost interest in the Iris'h revolutionary movement,nationalist and proletarian. He attached considerableimportance to the necessity of reaching the Irish nation-alist workers in the United States with the message ofsocialism. He founded the Irish Socialist Federation and

« The Harp, as its official organ. Of this monthly sheetConnolly was editor, printer and newsboy.

The Federation, and its mission, was .sneered at in asuperior manner by the official socialists and it gradually

declined. In 1910 Connolly returned to Ireland at theinvitation of some of Ms old comrades and he went towork in Belfast as organizer for the Irish Transport andGeneral Workers' Union, which was founded by JimLarkin. Connolly held this position until 1914, whenLarkin went to the United States on a speaking tour andremained there involuntarily for over eight years.

After Larkin left Ireland Connolly took charge of theI. T. and G. W. U. The union existed chiefly on paper.It was demoralized after the defeat inflicted on it in thegreat lockout of 1913-14. With all Connolly's ability asan organizer, he was unable to bring the membershipup to more than 5,000 when the Easter Week uprisingtook place.

When Connolly took charge of the union, one of hisfirst acts was to establish a printing plant for turning outillegal literature in Liberty Hall, the union headquarters.It was on this press that most of the revolutionary litera-ture was turned out in the early days of the war.

Connolly was everything but a pacifist. A student ofmilitary tactics, particularly of street fighting he devel-oped the Citizen Army, a military organization com-posed of trade unionists which grew out of the Dublinstrike. This little army was the back bone of the forcethat challenged the mighty power of imperial Britainin 1916. The Citizen Army guarded Liberty Hall againstthe British .soldiers and defended the illegal printingpress with their lives.

Connolly was determined that the opportunity present-ed by the imperialist war must not be allowed to passwithout revolutionary Ireland rising in arms against theempire. With this end in view he sought an alliancewith the Irish Republican Brotherhood, the descendantof the Fenian Brotherhood, which gave England a night-mare after the American Civil War. . The alliance wasconsummated and thus Connolly brought about a unionbetween the revolutionary nationalists and the militantsection of labor, tho taking care to preserve the inde-

pendence of the labor movement. He consistently point-ed out that Irish labor was aUways betrayed in the pastwhen it allowed itself to be made the tool of the bour-geois class who always sold out to the foreign enemyat the first opportunity.

When the world war broke out Connolly like otherrevolutionists expected that the social democratic lead-ers would raise the .standard of revolt. He gave ventto his disappointment in language that burns and sears.He excoriated the social patriots and spurious pacifistswith voice and pen. He said that the declaration of warby the capitalists ishould be the signal for civil war onthe part of the European working class, that the work-ers should raise the banner of revolution when the "firstnote from the bugle of war rang out upon their ears".Instead the traitorous leaders "who pledged the life longlove of comrades in the international army of labor" be-cause the hangmen and murderers of the working classand the bullets that snuffed out the life of James Con-nolly were fired by guns directed by a British cabinetin which s<at a member of the Second International, theHonorable Arthur Henderson.

When Connolly bid bood bye to his comrades in theunion headquarters as he was leaving for his last fighthe said to one of them with a smile on his lip and thatlaughing glint in his eye: "We are going out to getslaughtered. Stay with the union. It needs you."

When the gallant little army of rebels surrendered,neither Connolly nor his comrades asked for quarter.They insisted that their followers be exempted from thedeath penalty. The promise was made only to be brok-en, in harmony with Britain's record thru Irish history.Connolly was carried on a stretcher to the place of exe-cution, propped up against a wall and murdered. TheBritish knew what they were doing when they mur-dered James Connolly but they paid thru the nose for itsince then and the deibt is still unpaid.

In Connolly's death the Irish labor movement lost its

pendence of the labor movement. He consistently point-ed out that Irish labor was aUways betrayed in the pastwhen it allowed itself to be made the tool of the bour-geois class who always sold out to the foreign enemyat the first opportunity.

When the world war broke out Connolly like otherrevolutionists expected that the social democratic lead-ers would raise the .standard of revolt. He gave ventto his disappointment in language that burns and sears.He excoriated the social patriots and spurious pacifistswith voice and pen. He said that the declaration of warby the capitalists ishould be the signal for civil war onthe part of the European working class, that the work-ers should raise the banner of revolution when the "firstnote from the bugle of war rang out upon their ears".Instead the traitorous leaders "who pledged the life longlove of comrades in the international army of labor" be-cause the hangmen and murderers of the working classand the bullets that snuffed out the life of James Con-nolly were fired by guns directed by a British cabinetin which s<at a member of the Second International, theHonorable Arthur Henderson.

When Connolly bid bood bye to his comrades in theunion headquarters as he was leaving for his last fighthe said to one of them with a smile on his lip and thatlaughing glint in his eye: "We are going out to getslaughtered. Stay with the union. It needs you."

When the gallant little army of rebels surrendered,neither Connolly nor his comrades asked for quarter.They insisted that their followers be exempted from thedeath penalty. The promise was made only to be brok-en, in harmony with Britain's record thru Irish history.Connolly was carried on a stretcher to the place of exe-cution, propped up against a wall and murdered. TheBritish knew what they were doing when they mur-dered James Connolly but they paid thru the nose for itsince then and the debt is still unpaid.

In Connolly's death the Irish labor movement lost its

only revolutionary theoretician. Connolly had little usefor the windy blatherskite or for the cloister sociologist.He was a. well-rounded revolutionary, indeed, as ComradeSchuller points out a true Leninist before that word wascoined into the English language. His life, his workand his heroic death should be an inspiration to thosewho must carry forward the flag where it dropped, tornand blodostained from his hands. Not only is Connolly'smemory a heritage of the Irish working class but histactics in the Irish struggle against British imperialismcan be studied to advantage by the workers of all lands.He is Ireland's most precious contribution to the inter-national proletariat.

In publishing this little book the Workers (Communist)Party, not only pays a deserving tribute to our martyredcomrade, but it also wishes to bring the attention ofworkers of Irish birth or descent in the United States tothe necessity of joining hands with workers of all racesin the land in which they are exploited to the end thatthey may emancipate themselves from the thralldom ofthe system which Connolly died fighting against andto erect upon its ruins the Workers' Republic whichConnolly laid down his life fighting for.

—T. J. O'Flaherty.December 20, 1926.

4 4 T'

Jim" Connolly and the Irish Risingof 1916.

The Significance of Ireland for the Comintern.

IN this age so prolific in anniversaries, one event shouldnot be forgotten—at the end of April and the begin-

ning of May, 1926, we celebrate the Tenth Anniversaryof the Irish Rising in 1916, and the shooting of its leader,James Connolly.

During the past few years Ireland has been relativelyquiet, both <as regards general and internal British policy.But it would be a serious mistake to regard as permanentthe present stagnation in the political life of the work-ers and toiling peasantry of Ireland. Already there aresigns of revival. The Irish question has not been solvedby the creation of the Irish "Free State" with Dominionrights, nor has the misery of the oppressed Irish work-ers and small peasantry been in any way alleviatedthereby. Directly under the noses of the lords of thegreatest Imperialist State in Europe exists the greatestanti-imperialist force, the .significance of which will con-tinue to develop the greater the decline of British capi-talism. The mutual support of the British and Irishworking masses in their struggle against the commonenemy is of the greatest importance, and not least forthe British worker.

It is noteworthy that Ireland, in spite of its revolu-tionary significance and possibilities, has hitherto playedbut an insignificant role in the Communist International.The main reason for this lies in the decline of the revo-lutionary Labor movement in Ireland itself; this of lateyears has reached a regrettable level, the causes ofwhich call for investigation. Ireland with its complicatedconditions presents special difficulties to the Communistmovement. It is therefore most important for us tostudy these special conditions and the experience of the

revolutionary struggle in Ireland. The 1916 rising madeby troops mainly composed of workers, agricultural la-borers and laboring peasants, and the work of that greatIrish Marxist who led this insurrection, played a mostimportant role in this struggle. Here we have the op-portunity of studying the strong and weak sides of theyoung Irish Labor movement, since Connolly himself inhis qualities and faults was a typical representative ofthe best section of the working class of his country.

The British oppressor has always been a past masterin the art of keeping not only Europe but also his owncountry in the dark about conditions and events in Ire-land, therelby isolating the Irish fighters for freedom.This isolation was not without effects upon the work-ers also, and thus it happened that the works of a JamesConnolly must today be dug out, so to speak, while theworkers are almost ignorant of the fact that in Irelanda revolutionary Marxist of the first water worked andstruggled. A Marxist far beyond his contemporaries inthe LaJbor movement of the Anglo-Saxon countries, heunderstood despite his early end, and put into practice,the basic theories of Leninism. The title of honor mustbe given him, in the following pages we will show howhe applied this point of view to the basic questions ofthe Irish working class.

The Role of the Working Class in the Irish Struggle forFreedom.

A biographer of Connolly* who examined the origin ofhis popularity amongst the Irish workers refers to theproblem of "'Connolly',s secret." As a solution he findsonly a few general phrases about understanding how tosubject the lesser to the greater, etc. "Connolly's secret,"however, is quite clear. It is THE COMBINATION OFTHE NATIONAL REVOLUTIONARY STRUGGLE ANDOP THE REVOLUTIONARY CLASS STRUGGLE OF

*D. Ryan. "James Connolly." London, 1924.

8

THE WORKING CLASS. IT IS THE PROOF OF THENECESSITY OF LEADERSHIP IN THE STRUGGLEFOR NATIONAL LIBERATION IN IRELAND.

Connolly ardently sympathized with the hatred of themasses against the imperialist oppression of Great Brit-ain, and with their longing for national liberty. In thenarrow sense of the word he was no nationalist; on thecontrary, he was active both in theory and practice as aMarxist Internationalist. He was a stranger to any feel-ing against England as .such. He spent the greater partof his youth in England, where he was active as an agi-tator in the Social Democratic Federation and frequentlyworked in the closest harmony with the British Labormovement against capitalists both in England and Ire-land. He loved to use the declaration of the "UnitedIrelanders" from the time of the first French Revolution.

"As to any union between the two islands, believeus when we assert that OUR UNION RESTS UPONOUR MUTUAL INDEPENDENCE. WE SHALL LOVEEACH OTHER IF WE BE LEFT TO OURSELVES."

Connolly took a deep interest in the history of theIrish struggle for liberation, those 700 years of tragichistory of wars, unsuccessful risings, treason, terror andfamine. He raised the question as to the causes of thefailure of the former movements, especially those dur-ing the past hundred and fifty years. As answer hefound that the national struggle had not been linked upwith the .social struggle. He declares in his most im-portant work, "Labor in Irish History"*:

". . . . As we have again and again pointed out,the Irish question is a .social question, the whole age-long fight of the Irish people against their oppressors

*"Labor in Irish History." This classical Marxisttreatment of the Irish question is quite unknown on theContinent. It is really most important that this bookshould be published both in the Russian and in the Ger-man languages.

resolves itself in the last analysis into a fight for themastery of the means of life, the sources of productionin Ireland. Who would own and control the land? Thepeople or the invaders; and if the invaders, which setof them—the most recent swarm of land thieves, orthe sons of the thieves of a former generation? Thesewere the bottom questions of Irish politics, and allother questions were valued or deprecated in the pro-portion to which they contributed to serve the interestsof some of the factions who had already taken theirstand in this fight around property interests."The result of this was that very many struggles for

freedom failed because they did not carry with themthe working masses, for

"the producing cla&ses could not be expected to rallyto the revolution unless given to understand that itmeant their freedom from social as well as from polit-ical bondage."This, however, does not give quite a clear interpreta-

tion of the failure of the national struggle. A furtherreason was to be found in the leadership of this strug-gle. The rich bourgeoisie, bound 'by a thousand ties tothe ruling class in England and terrified of the classstruggle, betrayed the struggle for national liberty; themiddle and petty (bourgeoisie wavered helplessly andsought a peaceful compromise in the most constitution-al manner possible, always in fear that their agitationmight cause the working masses to raise the social ques-tion.

"The spokesmen of the middle class, in the pressand on the platform, have consistently sought theemasculation of the Irish National Movement, the dis-tortion of Irish history, and, above all, the denial ofall relation between the Asocial rights of the Irish toil-ers and the political rights of the Irish nation. It washoped and intended by this means to create what istermed 'a real National movement,' i. e., a movementin which each class would recognize the rights of the

10

other classes and laying aside their contentions wouldunite in a national struggle against the common ene-my—England. Needless to say, the only class deceivedby such phrases wa.s the working class.

"When questions of 'class' interests are eliminatedfrom public controversy a victory is thereby gained forthe possessing, conservative class, whose only hope ofsecurity lies in such elimination. During the last hun-dred years every generation in Ireland has witnessedan attempted rebellion against English rule. Everysuch conspiracy or rebellion has drawn the majorityof its adherents from, the lower orders in town andcountry, yet under the inspiration of a few middle classdoctrinaires the social question has been rigoro slyexcluded from the field of action to be covered by therebellion if successful; in hopes that by such exclu-sion it would (be possible to conciliate the upper class-es and enlist them in the struggle for freedom. Theresult has in nearly every case been the same. Theworkers, though furnishing the greatest proportion ofrecruits to the ranks of the revolutionists, and conse-quently of victims to the prison and the scaffold, couldnot be imbued en masse with the revolutionary firenecessary to seriously imperil a domination rooted for700 years in the heart of their country. They were allanxious enough for freedom, (but realizing the enor-mous odds against them, and being explicitly told bytheir leaders that they MUST NOT EXPECT ANYCHANGE IN THEIR CONDITION OF SOCIAL SUB-JECTION, EVEN tip SUCCESSFUL, they as a bodyshrank from the contest, and left only the purest mind-ed and most chivalrous of their class to face the oddsand glut the vengeance of the tyrant."

Hence, declared €onnolly, the liberation .struggle inIreland was only possible under the leadership of theworking class, which should now take over the lead inthis struggle.

"The result of the long drawn out struggle of Ire-

11

land has ibeen, so far, that the old chieftainry has dis-appeared, or through its degenerate descendants hasmade terms with iniquity, and become part and parcelof the supporters of the established order; the middleclas's, growing up in the mid.st of the national struggle,and at one time, as in 1798, through the stress of theeconomic rivalry of England almost forced into theposition of revolutionary leaders against the politicaldespotism of their industrial competitors, have nowalso bowed the knee to Baal, and have a thousand eco-nomic strings in the shape of investments bindingthem to English capitalism, as against every sentiment-al or historic attachment drawing them towards Irishpatriotism, only the Irish working class remain as theincorruptible inheritors of the fight for freedom inIreland."The National movement was at a low ebb when Con-

nolly began his activities in Ireland in the '90's. The de-velopment o*f British capitalism had not been withoutits effects on Ireland, and crumbs from the ta»ble of im-perialist England had fallen to the upper and middleclasses in Ireland. The land reforms had had a tempo-rary pacifying effect on the peasantry, hence the Nation-al movement had adopted a rather tame form; Its pro-gram was simply Home Rule, limited autonomy withinthe framework of Great Britain, and the road theretowas by constitutional methods.

Connolly started a bitter struggle against the HomeRulers. His program was clear and definite: completeseparation from Great Britain, an independent Irish Re-public. The road thereto was by means of mass or-ganization and of mass struggle, using every possiblelegal method and in the final issue revolutionary instruc-tion.

In 1898 Connolly founded the Irish Socialist RepublicanParty and its organ, "The Workers' Republic." The I.S. R. P. declares its program to be the development ofan Irish Socialist Republic 'based on public ownership by

12

the Irish people of the land and the means of production,distribution and exchange.

'Connolly himself writes about the effect of the newParty upon the political life on Ireland:

"It is no exaggeration to say that this organizationand its policy completely revolutionized advanced poli-tics in Ireland. When it was first initiated the word'Republic' was looked upon as a word to be only whis-pered among intimates; the iSocialists boldly advisedthe driving from 'political life of all who would notopenly accept it. The thought of revolution was theexclusive possession of a few remnants of the secretsocieties of a past generation, and was never men-tioned by them except with head.s close together andeyes fearfully glancing round. The Socialists brokethrough this ridiculous secrecy, and in hundreds ofspeeches in the most public places of the metropolis,as well as in .scores of thousands of pieces of literaturescattered through the country, announced their pur-pose to muster all the forces of Labor for a revolu-tionary reconstruction of society."

Just as Connolly ifounded the first Socialist LaborParty in Ireland, so too he worked with the greatest en-thusiasm in organizing the trade unions. Together withJim Larkin he roused with his fiery agitation and aptleadership the working masses in Ireland, and workedfor the foundation of trade union organizations. WhenJim Larkin founded the Irish Transport and GeneralWorkers' Union he received the full support of Connolly,who together with Larkin became the most importantorganizer in the movement. And what is still more, itcan be justly said that Connolly was the theoretician ofthe movement. He applied in a brilliant manner thegood that he had learned in America from the Indus-trialists. 'Still, although he fought for the correct revo-lutionary aspect of industrialism in contrast to the out-of-date reformist ideas of craft unionism, he struggledagainst every tendency towards separation from the "po-

13

litical movement." On the contrary, the Transport Work-ers' movement formed the basis for the creation of theIrish Labor Party, and was at the same time the mostactive factor in the national revolutionary movement forliberation.

The general strike of the Dublin workers in 1913marked the brilliant climax of the trade union massmovement which was thus created.

The U n i o n with the Peasantry.

Just as Connolly was convinced of the necessity of theleadership of the working class, so too he realized thatits fate was inseparably involved with that of the peas-antry, with whom union must be established if nationaland social liberation were to be attained. He stood forthe Leninist interpretation of this alliance both in the-ory and in practice. Since the Irish question, at leastuntil the beginning of this century, fundamentally re-volved around the question, "Who possesses the land andgoverns?" he took as starting point the understandingof the Irish struggle for freedom.

During the 700 years of British rule the Irish peas-antry, which had hitherto owned and tilled the land onthe basis of a kind of clan kinship, had been robbed oftheir land with the most fearful cruelty. The land wasgiven to the British conquerors and their supporters andservants. The peasants were driven away and physic-ally destroyed by wars, hunger and terror, or remainedas tenant farmers. In this way, the peasants came tolive as tenants on that .same ground which in reality be-longed to them, and at the same time were obliged to paythe landlords scandalously high rents. The result wasmisery amongst the peasants, which was hard to dis-tinguish from chronic famine. Ireland produced and ex-ported large quantities of corn, ibut the peasants mainlyexisted on potatoes.

Every bad 'potato harvest made a big change for theworse in the condition of the peasantry. In 1845-1849,

14

there was a terrible famine, which brought in its wakethe deaths of several hundred thousands from hungerand fever. And during this time Ireland continued toexport corn for large sums of money. Even today, afterthe agrarian reform, such periods of famine are stillpossible, as was proved by the famine in Ireland in thewinter of 1924-25, which was particularly rampant amongthe peasants in the West.

The result of this condition of the peasantry werevoiced in many peasant risings and revolts, in which thepeasantry supplied the mass of the troops until the timeof the development of the industrial proletariat. In thefamine years, in 1848, and in the '70's under the leader-ship of the "Land League" these peasant risings wereparticularly widespread.

The year 1848 was also marked as a year of disgrace-ful weakness and treachery on the part of the 'pettybourgeoisie and the betrayal of a powerful and speciallyhopeful revolutionary mass movement. Connolly writesbitterly and with contempt of the leaders of the "YoungIreland" movement, wrho from fear of the social landdemands of the peasantry lost a favorable possibility forrevolution and separation from England. Our Irish Gi-rondists sacrificed the Irish peasantry on the altar ofprivate property. With scorn he writes ("Labor in IrishHistory") about these "revolutionaries" who wanted tocarry out the rising in a "respectable" manner:

"English army on one side, provided with guns,bands and banners; Irish army on the other side, alsoprovided with guns, bands and banners, 'serried rankswith glittering steel/ no mere proletarian insurrection,and no interference with the rights of property . . .But the crowning absurdity of all was the leadershipof William (Smith O'Brien. He wandered through thecountry telling the starving peasantry to get ready, butrefusing to allow them to feed themselves at the ex-pense of the landlords who had so long plundered,starved, and evicted them; he would not allow his fol-

15

lowers to seize upon the carts of grain passing alongthe roads where the people were dying for want offood; at Maillinahone he refused to allow his followersto 'fell trees to build a barricade across the road untilthey had asked permission of the landlords wrho ownedthe trees."As a counterpart to this Connolly writes full of ap-

preciation of the Fenians who in their struggle for na-tional freedom and social liberty of the workers joinedwith the Land League, i. e., the peasants in the struggle

for the land:"When the revolutionary nationalists threw in their

lot with the Irish Land League, and made the landstruggle the basis for their warfare, they were not onlyplacing themselves in touch once more with those in-exhausta'ble quarries of material interests from whichall the great Irish statesmen from Laurence O'Toole toWolfe Tone drew the stones upon which they buildtheir edifice of a militant patriotic Irish organization,but they were also, consciously or unconsciously, plac-ing themselves in accord with the principles whichunderlie and inspire the modern movement of Labor."

This union of the workers and peasants Connolly de-clared to be the basis and inspiration of the modern La-bor movement, and in full recognition he points out thatthe principles of the Land League were not only recog-nized as Communist, but that the organ of the LandLeague in America, "The Irish World," bore the sub-titleof "American Industrial Liberator."

The agrarian reform was introduced. The causestherefore were the pressure 'brought to bear by the LandLeague movement and the circumstance that the invest-ment of capital in industrial undertakings, because ofthe competition of American corn, had become moreprofitable than agriculture in Ireland. For this reason,the British Parliament, at the close of the last centuryand the beginning of the present, decided upon a series

16

of laws enabling the peasants to purchase their landfrom the landlords. The peasants were able to securethe land on credit advanced toy the State at 49 years'purchase at the rate of four per cent (later three anda quarter per cent). The landlords received in additionto the market price of their'land an additional sum fromthe State varying 'between three and eight per cent. Theresult of these reforms, or rather this buying out of thelandlords, was the transformation of Ireland graduallyfrom a country of tenants to that of a country of .smallpeasants who owned their own farms. In 1914 therewere 348,855 peasants wyho owned their own land and217,282 tenant farmers. This latter figure has been re-duced still more since that time, and today only aboutone-third of the land is held on lease.

In spite of these reforms the overwhelming majority ofpeasants even today do not employ hired labor. That isto say, the overpowering mass of the Irish country folkis composed of laboring peasants (petty peasants andtenant farmers). This peasantry is oppressed by theheavy weight of debt. It is obliged to pay twice as muchfor its own land as it is worth, as a result of all this in-terest, extras and land speculation.

"Thus the Irish people found themselves robbed invery deed for a second time. First, the Britishers tooktheir land away from them by force, and then bymeans of Acts of Parliament forced them to pay morethan double the price for this same land."*in addition to this, there was a further nuisance, the

"Gombeen men," traders and bank capitalists, who inthe small rural places acted as veritable leeches on therural population and were hand in glove with the formerlandlords.

'Indeed the buying out of the landlords in manycases served only to gorge still further the ever-rapacious maw of those parasites upon rural life."t

*Kernheizev ("Revolutionary Ireland"), Moscow, 1923.tJ. Connolly, "The Reconquest of Ireland," Dublin, 1914.

17

'Connolly cherished no illusions about the land "re-form." He showed -up the fact that the mass of thepeasantry was still steeped in misery and that the neces-sity for joint struggle with the workers .still existed, waseven still greater than hitherto. The opponent and ex-ploiter had only changed his shape. Formerly that shapewas that of a feudal capitalist landlord and now thepeasantry was faced with trade and bank capital andthe collector of the British government.

'Connolly wrote on the effects of the reforms on theland question:

"But that question so dreaded rises again; it willnot lie down, and cannot be suppressed. The partialsuccess of the band League has effected a change inIreland, the portent of which but few realize. Statedbriefly, it means that the recent Land Acts, actingcontemporaneously with the development of trans-Atlantic traffic, are converting Ireland into a countrygoverned according to the conception of feudalism in-to a country shaping itself after capitalist laws oftrade. That war which the Land League fought, andthen abandoned, before it was either lost or won, willbe taken up by the Irish toilers on a broader field withsharper weapons, and a more comprehensive knowledgeof all the essentials of permanent victory. As theIrish septs of the past were accounted Irish or Eng-lish according as they rejected or accepted the nativeor foreign social order, as they measured their oppres-sion or freedom by their loss or recovery of the col-lective ownership of their lands, so the Irish toilersfrom henceforward will base their fight for freedomnot upon the winning or losing the right to talk in anIrish Parliament, but upon their progress towards themastery of those factories, workshops, and farms uponwhich a people's bread and liberties depend."The correctness of this analysis was proved by the

role which the peasants played in the civil war, 1919-1921,

18

during which agrarian unrest and arbitrary expropria-tion by the peasants took place.

According to 'Connolly, Co-operation was one of themost important forms of joint work between peasantsand workers. Larkin couched his and Connolly's pro-gram thus: To organize the workers into unions ac-cording to industry, to join them together into one po-litical unit and at the same time to unite the agricul-tural workers with the urban workers through Co-operation.

As we will see from the quotation given below; Con-nolly went still further. To his mind Co-operatives didnot only constitute contact between workers and peas-ants but also provided the possibility of a joint LaborParty (as we would say today a Farmer-Labor Party).

His genius penetrated still further. He understoodthat the Co-operatives provided the only way of trans-forming agriculture under conditions of private owner-ship to Socialism and after the overthrow of capitalismthe Co-operatives would act as a means by which theconflict between town and country would be overcome,and both would be joined together in a unified Socialisteconomy. And 'Connolly emphasizes:

"If to that combination of agriculturalists and urbanlaborers we have just hinted at, as a possibility of co-operation upon the economic field, we add the furtherpossible development of an understanding upon thepolitical field between these two groups of co-operatorswe begin to realize the great and fundamental changenow slowly maturing in our midst . . . Then whento the easily organized laborers of the towns is addedthe staying power of the peasantry, and when repre-sentatives appear in the Halls of Legislature voicingtheir combined demands, the Party of Labor which willthus manifest itself will speak with a prophetic voicewhen it proclaims its ideal of a regenerated Irelandre-conquered for its common people.

19

"For the only true prophets are they who carve outthe future which they announce."*

Connolly, the Revolutionary and Marxist.

Connolly was proud to declare himself a Marxist. Hemakes frequent reference to Marx in his book, "Laborand Irish History," which in itself represents an attemptto apply Marxist method to Irish history. He speaks ofMarx as "the greatest of modern thinkers and the firstscientific Socialist."

Connolly was enabled to follow a real Marxist tacticby the fact of his profound understanding of Marxism.He pursued a real Marxist policy, between the open re-formists on the one hand and the pure military revolu-tionaries (no rarity in Ireland), the rigid trade unionistsand the sectarian pseudo-Marxist Socialists on the other.

Constitutional Fabianism earned his contempt. He wasfully aware of the advantage of utilizing all legal possi-bilities and of the necessity of spending years in organ-izing, agitating for the daily struggle on behalf of partialdemands. But he would countenance no infringement ofthe recognition that the final issue of all great politicaland .social questions could only be decided >by force, andthat Ireland's liberation from the British imperialistyoke and the social emancipation of its workers wasonly possible through revolutionary channels. He, theorganizer of industrial trade unions, fought political sec-tarianism at the same time. He invited his comrades ofthe Scottish Social Democratic Federataion to drop theirsectarian scruples (amongst which was the oath of alle-giance to king and constitution) and to enter Parliamentas a political party.

Connolly was a revolutionary to the core. McManusonce wrote (1919) that Connolly was the only Social-ist he had met who judged the social position or politicalcrisis from the standpoint of its revolutionary possibili-

*"Reconquest of Ireland."

20

ties. As was worthy of a revolutionary, he occupiedhimself seriously with the political, tactical, and militaryquestions of a rising in Ireland. He understood verywell the Leninist conception that a rising is an "art"which has got to be "studied."

During the war his journal, "The Workers' Republic,"gave the place of honor to studies about risings, streetfights in Moscow in 1905, Paris in 1S30 and in 1848, therising in the Tyrol in 1905, and guerilla warfare in India,revolutionary struggles in Mexico, and similar happen-ings. At a meeting of the officers of the revolutionaryIrish Volunteer Army, Connolly was asked during hislecture on street fights how it happened that he under-stood so much about revolutionary and military ques-tions. He smilingly replied "You forget that revolutionis my business." (jRyan, "J. Connolly.")

It is very worthy of note that Connolly grasped theconception of the Soviet idea. Daniel De Leon influencedhim very much in this, he had worked jointly with himin America. Just as he, so too did Connolly declare thatthe future government and the future division of thecountry would be based not on territory but on pro-duction and its component parts and 'branches.

Against the Imperialist War.

lit is a platitude to state that Connolly as a revolu-tionary fighter against imperialism was also an ardentfighter against the last imperialist war. The breakdownof the Socialist International oppressed him greatly. Tothis was added the complete treachery of the Irish bour-geois and petty bourgeois Nationalists. The former, theHome Rulers, under Redmond's leadership, went overcompletely to the camp of the British Imperialists; thelatter, weak and vacillating, expected to get all assist-ance from the Germans. From the very beginning Con-nolly was quite clear that only 'by a rising of the work-ers could the war be put a stop to, and also that such agreat revolutionary rising would take place. On August

21

15, 1914, he wrote to this effect in the Glasgow "For-ward." He expressed to the Scottish comrades the wishto take active part in such a co-ordinated internationalstruggle of the workers.

•It is 'not clear why "Connolly's Party which had affiliat-ed to the Second International had had so little contactwith the Left Wing of this 'International. It is quitepossible that the isolation of Ireland through Englandduring the war was responsible for this.

There was no doubt in Connolly's mind that the waras far as Ireland was concerned would not end withouta decisive revolutionary struggle and rising. He under-stood only too well that this war intensified the crisisto a great extent, and must one way or another lead to adecision in Ireland. Further, he declared, that therenever was a more favorable moment than the present for'Ireland to fight for its freedom. "England's difficulty isIreland's opportunity." In this sense Connolly preachedopen revolutionary defeatism.

"But we also believe that in times of war we shouldact as in war . . . We shall continue in season andout of season, to teach that 'the far-flung battle line'of England is weakest at the point nearest its heart,that Ireland is in that position of tactical advantage,that a defeat of England in India, Egypt, the Balkansor Flanders, would not be so dangerous to the BritishEmpire as conflict of armed forces in Ireland, that thetime for Ireland's Battle is Now—the place for Ire-land's Battle is Here."This declaration shows the Leninist spirit which per-

meated Connolly's policy.Connolly looked forward to the pending revolutionary

struggle in Ireland not merely as an Irish affair, but hehoped that it might form the beginning of the interna-tional revolution.

"Starting thus, Ireland may yet set the torch to aEuropean conflagration that will not burn out untilthe last throne and the last capitalist bond and deben-

22

tare are shrivelled up on the funeral pyre of the lastwar lord."This brings us to the Easter of 1916, the first upheaval

in Ireland.

The Easter Rising.

Irish bourgeois nationalists and British Socialistssought and seek still in vain for an explanation of Con-nolly's leadership of the Easter rising. Much as theselatter sympathized with Connolly as a labor leader andSocialist they could not understand how he could takepart in such an act and thus we see the strangest en-deavors to explain, or rather to excuse Connolly's atti-tude during the Red Easter of 1916. It is no small won-der that the Irish rising was either rejected toy the Brit-ish Labor movement, or in the most favorable instancewas received with a lack of general understanding.

Some attributed Connolly's attitude to the influence ofhis comrade, Pearce, the Republican, who is said tohave believed in a mystic manner that every generationof Ireland must offer up a blood sacrifice. The othersexplained the rising as a result of Connolly's depres-sion and despair caused by the war and the position of•Ireland. His decision was also attributed to the fact ofhis .bitter sorrow at the breakdown of the Socialist In-ternational and his mental rejection of the mutualslaughter of the workers of all countries, which impelledhim to deal a blow, no matter how few people he couldwin to his side.

Others explained the rising as a demonstration of thewish to show that Ireland was not loyal and did not re-linquish her demands.

Others again simply declared the rising was a "Putsch."Of course, all these explanations are so much non-

sense: meant to excuse Connolly, they accuse their origi-nators by showing that they are at loggerheads withthe principles of revolutionary struggle, or that they

23

totally misunderstand them. Besides, they are absolute-ly contrary to the actual facts.

The events proved the correctness of Connolly's Len-inist analysis. The war brought economic want to thecountry. It increased to an extreme degree oppressionand deprivation of political rights. Arrests, confisca-tion, suppression of papers, were the order of the day.Slowly there ripened amongst the masses a condition ofrevolutionary discontent. The growing strength of therevolutionaries compelled the British government to pre-pare, nervously and anxiously, a large-scale destructiveoffensive and a regime of general reaction.

These conditions brought about a rapprochement be-tween the revolutionary groups. These were: the IrishTransport Workers' Union and the Irish Socialists, whorallied to Connolly's newspaper, the "Workers' Repub-lic," the Irish Citizen Army, which represented the mili-tary organization of both these workers' organizationsand was founded during the general strike in 1913, theSinn Peiners and the Irish Republican Volunteers. Boththe latter groups represented the radical lead of the pet-ty bourgeois nationalists, but at the same time had astrong following amongst the workers and peasants.

Connolly understood that in the coming revolutionarystruggle joint work was necessary between these groups.How he interpreted this is shown in the characteristicmanner in one of his declarations:

"The time is now ripe. ("Irish Worker," August15, 1914), nay the imperious necessities of the hourcall loudly for, demand the formation of a committeeof all the elements outside, as well as inside the Vol-unteers, to consider means to take and hold Ireland,and the food of Ireland, for the people of Ireland. Weof the Transport Union, we of the Citizen Army, areready for any such co-operation. We can bring it theaid of drilled and trained men; we can 'bring to it theheartiest efforts of men and women who in thousandshave shown that they know how to face prison and

24

death; and we can bring to it the services of thinkersand organizers who know that different occasions re-quire different policies—that you cannot legalize revo-lutionary actions and that audacity alone can commandsuccess in a crisis like this."

This collaboration became a reality and under Con-nolly's influence the Volunteers moved more and moreto the Left. The desire for revolutionary action grewamongst their ranks.

After a period of stormy events April, 1916 came. Ahighly charged atmosphere prevailed; mobilization ofboth sides began. The British government prepared forthe disarmament by force of the "Volunteers" and of the"Citizen Army" and the destruction of the entire move-ment. Connolly and his friends were of the opinion thatnow the time had come for the revolutionaries to actand to proceed from the defensive to the offensive. Theleaders of the Volunteers actually gave the order forgeneral maneuvers on a large scale at Easter, i. e., inother words, the signal for a rising. At the last mo-ment the. petty bourgeois leaders of the Volunteers re-scinded the order, mainly because the German help whichthey had expected had failed to arrive. This typical anddespicable act of petty bourgeois cowardice was toolate. It was not able to restrain the rising, but simplyundermined the onslaught. The people from "LibertyHall" who constituted the life and soul o'f the rising hadalready drawn up the proclamation of the Provisionalgovernment of an Independent Irish Republic. The work-ers and the revolutionary section of the Volunteers werenot prepared to give in without a struggle and refusedto carry out the order to disband. The rising was un-avoidable.

In accordance with the plan previously drawn up,Connolly undertook the leadership without any hesita-tion.

He undoubtedly hoped that they would succeed in car-rying with them the majority of the Volunteer Army;and that in any case the rising, even if it should fail,

25

would constitute the preliminary to a general large scalerevolutionary struggle. Hence, he also calmly and withdecision weighed the possibilities of its failure. His firsthope was shattered, not because the masses of the Vol-unteers were not ready, but because the disorganizationwhich the cowardly petty bourgeois leadership caused atthe last decisive moment was too great. Subsequentevents confirmed his second expectation to the full.

On the morning of April 24, the most important pointsof the city of Dublin were in the hands of the revolu-tionaries. Proclamations of the Provisional governmentwere posted up and the radio stations proclaimed on allsides the foundation of an Independent Irish Republic.The people participated in scenes of the most intenseenthusiasm.

Then the struggle began. About one thousand Volun-teers and workers' troops maintained their position formore than a week against a powerful British army. Onlyby ruthless use of artillery, which completely destroyedthe whole center of the city, and by numerical suprem-acy did the British succeed, with great losses, in forcingthe revolutionaries to surrender after a week's fighting.

Then an orgy of White Terror ensued. Mass shoot-ing of leaders, mass arrests, executions of non-combat-ants, devastation. In short, imperialistic British civiliza-tion showed itself in its full development. Connolly didnot escape his doom. The British government, a gov-ernment in which sat Arthur Henderson, the presentSecretary of the Labor Party, signed the order for hisexecution, which took place on May the 12th. He hadbeen severely wounded in the struggle and was so weakthat he was unable to stand and was shot seated in achair. He met his end calmly and philosophically. Upto the last minute he remained what he had always been,a proletarian revolutionist.

The slogans of the rising were, "Down with the War!Down with British Imperialism! All hail a free IrishRepublic!" One may wonder, perhaps, that more definiteSocialist slogans did not play a bigger role in this strug-

26

gle, but we must not forget to take into considerationthat this rising was not the final struggle of the Irishworkers, 'but merely the preliminary thereto. In thisway, this first revolutionary outburst of the masses ob-tained expression at a moment when pressure was feltmost strongly from British imperialism and the war.But still the entire rising had a definite Socialist color.The Proclamation of the Irish Republic declared, althoughin vague terms, the right of the Irish people to the meansof production of wealth. It is apparent from the factthat the rising primarily appealed to the workers, thatthe masses of the fighters were workers and agriculturallaborers, and a considerable section of the leaders So-cialists and trade unionists.

The warm words with which Lenin wrote of this Eas-ter rising will best show our appreciation. In his ar-ticle, "The Results of the Discussion on Self-Determina-tion" of 1916* he attacks the "monstrous judgment" ofthose who termed this "heroic rising" a Putsch.

*Published in "Against the Stream.""Those who can term such a rising a Putsch areeither the worst kind of reactionaries or hopelesslydoctrinaires, incapable of imagining the social revo-lution as a living phenomenon."And again:

"To assume the possibility that a social revolutionwithout risings of small nations in the colonies andEurope, without revolutionary outbursts of the pettybourgeoisie, with all their prejudices, without move-ments of the unconscious proletarian and semi-prole-tarian masses against the oppression of landownersand the church and monarchists and national oppres-sion, is equivalent to denying the social revolution."The Irish rising was, as Lenin shows, a manifestation

of the serious crisis of imperialism, a crisis which in1917-18, led to the collapse of a number of imperialiststates and to the Proletarian Revolution.

"The crisis of imperialism was at that time still farremoved from the stage of its highest development:

27

the power of the imperialist bourgeoisie had not yetbeen overcome (the war to a finish can bring thatabout, at present it has not gone so fa r ) ; proletarianmovements are still very weak in imperialist states."

"The misfortune of the Irish lay in the fact thattheir rising was untimely, since the rising of the Eu-ropean proletariat was NOT YET ripe. Capitalism isnot so harmoniously constructed that separate sourcesof risings can suddenly unite without failure of over-throw. On the contrary, the difference in time, the dif-ference and dissimilarity in the place of the risingsact as a, guarantee for the greatness and depth ofthe joint movement; it is only by untimely, partiallyand consequently unsuccessful attempts at revolution-ary risings that the masses will again experience,learn, assemble their forces, recognize their true lead-ers, the Socialist proletarians, and thereby preparethe joint attack; just as isolated strikes, town and na-tional demonstrations, mutinies in the army, peasantrisings, etc., prepared the general attack in 1905."

Civ i l War and the "Free State."

Lenin's prophetic word was fulfilled. The Easter ris-ing marked the beginning of a new epoch. The risingand the persecutions accomplished in a few weeks whatthe propaganda of years had failed to do: the ideas ofthe extreme revolutionary groups and their methodswere supported by the masses.* The revolutionariesrealized that the only way to liberate Ireland wasthrough a revolutionary struggle, and they won overpractically the whole mass off the Irish people to thisprogram.

Then came the years of the widespread partisan war,1919-1921, which stand without parallel in the history ofrevolutionary struggles, in wrhich the Irish Republic, cre-ated at Easter, 1916, was actually thrust on British im-perialism. In the end the British government had toclimb down in order not to lose everything. In 1921Ireland was made a Free State with Dominion rights like

28

Australia and South Africa, having previously separatedfrom the North (Ulster). But even this partial successwas only possible as the result of the armed revolu-tionary struggle which had been inaugurated by theEaster rising.

The disunited, petty bourgeois nature of the leadershipof the struggle was shown by the Republican consent tothis compromise. Only the radical wing, consisting main-ly of working elements, agricultural laborers, and thepoorer petty bourgeoisie, refused to accent the compro-mise; these were led by De Valera. Then a fresh civilwar ensued and the world witnessed the .sad exampleof the Irish Nationalists and Republicans, in the garb ofthe Free State, but really as the agents of British im-perialism and of the Irish capitalists, slaughtering byhundreds Irish Republicans and fighters for freedom.

*Kernheitzer. "Revolutionary Ireland."Today the Free State has become a respectable Do-

minion of the British Empire, Mr. Cosgrave, the President,on the occasion of the last attack on Mussolini's nose,sent a moving and servile telegram of sympathy.

But naturally the Irish question has not bean solvedthereby, nor have its workers foeen helped; the role ofliberator falls to the workers of Ireland.

The Irish Labor movement after the Easter rising com-mitted a number of serious errors. Up to that time ithad taken the lead politically in the struggle againstBritish imperialism, and in the struggle against conscrip-tion in 1917-1918 by means of the strike weapon. Butnow it resigned this leadership into the hands of thepetty bourgeoisie. At the time of the 1918 elections itdecided not to put forward any Labor Party or tradeunion candidates because of the Sinn Feiners. This wasa suicidal manner of establishing the united front againstBritish imperialism. But it served as only one examplein a long political history of how the active elements ofthe working class were completely enmeshed in the pettybourgeois Republican movement, and how the workersand toiling peasantry again were taken in too by the

29

petty bourgeoisie. The Labor movement has not takento heart Connolly's Leninist slogan, that in spite of theunited front with the revolutionary nationalists the work-ers must retain their independence and their leadingrole.

De Valera's tardy (or premature [?]) rising against thecompromise and the Free State, in which many workersand agricultural laborers took part, was also a mistake.It had as a result the further destruction of the activeforces of the workers and the revolutionary strata of thepetty 'bourgeoisie.

Today the position of the revolutionary movement inIreland is most unsatisfactory. The trade union move-ment is split and weakened. There is neither a SocialistLabor Party nor a Communist Party. The Labor Partyis weak and expends its energy in petty reformist work.In reality, it is simply the parliamentary representativeof the trade unions and has no proper organization.Amongst the remaining Republicans who have been quitescattered, there are many good revolutionary forces. Thepeasants are unorganized.

Thus we see that the first task of the Irish workingclass is to consolidate its forces and create a virile lead-ership and organization. It is an absolute necessity tofound a class conscious revolutionary Labor Party, andin this connection we must welcome the existing ten-dencies towards forming an Irish Workers' Party. Thetrade 'unions must be strengthened and made into a realpowerful trade union movement. The Labor Party mustraise the standard of Connolly; it ought never to losesight of the fact that the workers alone should havethe struggle for the final liberation from British imperial-ism and capitalism. It must not forget that for this endit must act jointly with the peasantry, and this is allthe more possible in Ireland since the majority consistsof hard working small farmers.

•Thus, in union with the British working class, theother oppressed people «in the British Empire and theworkers of other countries, the Irish workers will raisealoft in Ireland the red flag of the Irish Workers'Republic. G. Schiiller.

30

A Suggested List of Books on

Soviet RussiaRUSSIA TODAY

The Official Report of the British Trade UnionDelegation to Soviet Russia.

No book in recent years has created such wide-spread discussion in the labor movement. It isa most complete report on every phase of Sovietl i fe today—with maps and charts, including aspecial report on the famous "Zinoviev" letterand the Red International of Labor Unions.

Duroflex bound, $1,25

RUSSIAN WORKERS AND WORKSHOPS IN 1926By Wm. Z. Foster 25 Cents

GLIMPSES OF THE SOVIET REPUBLICBy Scott Nearing

RUSSIA TURNS EASTBy Scott Nearing

EDUCATION IN SOVIET RUSSIABy Scott Nearing

10 Cents

10 Cents

10 Cents

THE NEW THEATER AND CINEMA IN SOVIETRUSSIA

By Huntley Carter $6.00

ORDER FROM

THE DAILY WORKER PUB CO1113 W. Washington Blvd. Chicago III.