Main Document Index | ETOL Home Page
Copied with thanks from the Workers’ Republic Website.
Marked up by Einde O’Callaghan for ETOL.
The invasions of Denmark, Norway, Holland and Belgium has proved, if it ever needed proof, that the military defence of the neutrality of small states is impossible. The repulse of the invader necessitates calling in the aid of the other belligerent. The country becomes a cockpit of the imperialist war, and whatever the outcome in a military sense must emerge as a dependency of one or other imperialist power. Its existence as a free capitalist nation is ended.
Under certain conditions, the story of these countries may be repeated in Ireland. It is therefore our duty to get absolutely clear and correct ideas about “national defence”. Panicky or slipshod attempts to think up a labour policy which would gain popular support is likely to lead us onto a totally wrong road. We have to deal with big historical events in a big way. That means:
Why are we in especially acute danger today? Because the defeat of the traditional enemy and overlord of Ireland has laid us open to attack from two directions.
Ireland may in the near future be in the war zone – very unpleasant for us. But is it possible or honest to have one policy towards the world war so long as it is being fought in far-off Poland, and quite a different attitude to the same war when it happens to approach our own doorstep? Obviously not. A political position which corresponds to the real situation would apply with equal force in either case.
Capitalism nowadays is international. And Irish capitalism, like that of all the small countries, is a weakly plant incapable of separate existence. At present its roots are in England. In case of an absolute defeat for England its roots might be forcibly and painfully transferred to Germany. In no case would it have a free independent national existence as Norton, de Valera and Cosgrave wish to believe. A free capitalist Ireland is today an impossibility.
This general proposition can be expressed in economic or in military terms. The economic impossibility of a free Irish capitalism has been proved by the failure, under comparatively favourable conditions, to develop a prosperous and free Irish State. Experience has shown that, like any other country, Ireland depends on the world market which belongs to England and America. It was not, however, necessary to find out by experiment that a free Irish nation was impossible under capitalism. James Connolly saw that in advance by theoretical means – by a theory which applies with equal force to all small countries.
Expressed in military terms, the dependence of capitalist Ireland upon English imperialism means that the defence of the shores of Ireland by an Irish army is as impossible as the defence of Norway by a Norwegian army. Ireland could be reduced even by paratroops alone, with the help of the fifth column which is especially strong here. De Valera was right when he stated before the war that Irish defence measures were necessarily linked with English defence measures.
Ireland, like Norway, can only be defended in a military (capitalist) sense (1) against Germany, by the co-operation of English arms; (2) against England, by the co-operation of German arms. And in either case the “ally” will swallow us up and make an end to Irish nationhood, as a nuisance and an obstacle in the way of its imperialist aims, and of its desperate needs.
If it were possible, capitalist Ireland would keep out of the war, and make profits out of it. The same applies to any small country. But the big belligerents are in no mood to consider the wishes of the small fry. Ireland is inevitably dominated by the stronger military and economic force. So it comes about that de Valera, in spite of his attempts to strike some sort of bargain, has been forced to betray the Irish national struggle to England. In this he has the co-operation of Fine Gael and the Labour parliamentary group. The latter, because of its importance for hoodwinking purposes, has been over-represented in the joint committee (coalition) – so that Labour must take more than its share of responsibility for the Judas act. With the acquiescence of Norton, it will be argued that the army now being raised is a citizen army. (Norton proved in Conference that he was consciously preparing for this betrayal when he prevented a vote on neutrality on the grounds that it was a matter for the government, not for party policy.)
On the other hand, the IRA whose sole claim to existence is opposition to de Valera, Craigavon and England, can only carry out its opposition by betraying the national struggle at the first opportunity to Hitler. The symbol of the swastika and the slogan “Up Hitler” chalked on the walls in the Falls Road area show that in Belfast at least the IRA is consciously preparing to act as the fifth column. For the IRA, as for de Valera and Norton, there is no alternative to social revolution but betrayal.
Whenever politicians are faced with the impossibility of carrying out their stated aims, they talk loud and prepare to betray. A free capitalist Ireland is an impossibility. So all who support it, including the reformists, are now forced to turn traitor. Those who fail to see that our national liberation is only possible through a socialist revolution are faced now with an appalling paradox. Having abandoned socialism for nationalism, they have now no alternative but to betray the national struggle also – and that in the near future.
Revolutionary socialists cannot take sides with one or another brigand in the imperialist war, nor with their willing or unwilling accomplices in Ireland. If there were no alternative but England or Germany, we would have to sit with folded hands, quietly passing out of existence, confessing that socialism and internationalism is an illusion, and that there is no future for mankind but massacre, and endless chaos.
But we cannot pretend that the present situation has come as a surprise. For years we have prepared ourselves for it and have sketched out in broad outline that third alternative – the alternative of Connolly and Lenin.
Did I say that Germany could make a base here with the aid of the fifth column? That is not the whole truth. England, equally, has her firth column and can make a base here with its aid.
So long as the insurrectionary tendency is non-socialist and so looks to Hitler for support, it is nothing but the fifth column of Hitler.
So long as the anti-fascist tendency is non-socialist, and so looks to the allies for protection against Hitler, it is the fifth column of England.
The third alternative, against both belligerent camps, is the independent action of the working class, socialist, insurrectionary, and looking for support to the insurrectionary anti-war movement of the workers now germinating in the war-stricken countries.
The third alternative for Ireland is the fusion of the anti-English [and] anti-German tendencies under the banner of insurrectionary socialism, with international revolutionary support, especially from the British and French working class. Is this practical politics? How can such a line be applied?
Obviously socialist insurrection is not a practical possibility in Ireland today. But since it is the only way out in the long run, indirect preparation for this end is the only practical policy to pursue. And anything which does not lead in this direction is a red herring.
We face the probability that a civil war may develop prematurely – i.e. not under the leadership of the working class. So we face the probability of a smashing defeat for the workers in the near future. The probability of fascism, whether English or German or a native brand. But inevitably a second, and if needs be – though one shudders to think of the implications – a third, a fourth, a fifth revolutionary situation will arise. What we have to consider is what forces, what support can we gather for the victory of the working class in a revolutionary situation, whether it is the first that will arise or whether defeat and suppression will be the prelude to our final victory. (Preparations for the survival and strengthening of revolutionary socialism under suppression are obviously necessary.)
The goal of social revolution is enough to determine our general line from day to day. It is clear that our general aim must be for independent workers’ organisation and action.
Although the workers and small farmers cannot today see the logic of the whole revolutionary socialist position, we can, even today, develop an agitation which will help them to draw the correct lesson from future events.
This note is put forward as a basis for discussion of the underlying theory of the present situation, which, it is suggested, must be clearly defined before day to day action can be decided upon without risk of making disastrous mistakes. Immediate discussion between responsible socialists is, I think, essential.
Marxists’ Internet Archive | Encyclopedia of Trotskyism | Document Index Page
Last updated on 21.5.2004