SVSocialist Voice

The Establishment draws in recruitsfrom outside as soon as they are readyto conform to its standards andbecome respectable. There is nothingmore agreeable in life than to makepeace with the Establishment—andnothing more corrupting.A.J.P. Taylor, New Statesman (London), 29 August 1953.

Socialist Voice 43 East Essex Street Dublin D02 XH96 (01) 6708707

7125-1970NSSI

PQP1\UR7IG@j/7 ZpX/ zb

SINCE THE emergence of thepresent stage in the deepeningstructural crisis of the system in

2008, the ruling class, both at thenational level and throughout the EUand globally, have used this crisis todrive forward their agenda of pushingworking people back and reclaimingconcessions they were forced to makeand that were won by workers overmany decades.We have seen a significant growth in

precarious employment in variousbranches of the economy. While newworkers in the public sector enter atlower rates of pay and with worseconditions, they are also findingpromotional avenues closed off andadditional restrictions and barriersimposed. The limitation on trade unionrights because of anti-union lawsimposed on workers has restrictedtrade unions in defending theirmembers.Working people have seen the age of

retirement going up, while youngworkers experience endless schemes ofeither low-pay or no-pay jobs. The gapbetween rich and poor is growing, notonly at the national level but evenmore starkly at the global level.The economic and political strategy

of “austerity” has worked. It wasdesigned to benefit the rich: it hadnothing to do with the people’s needsor interests; it was for transferringwealth from Irish working peopleupwards to the rich. At the same timeIreland, as a peripheral state anddebtor-country within the EU, hasexperienced vast amounts of wealthbeing transferred outwards to the corecountries, with billions being takenfrom working people’s pockets andgiven to banks and finance houseswhile corporate executives bolster theirprofits and lavish life-styles.

continued overleaf

Communist Party of IrelandPáirtí Cumannach na hÉireann Partisan Patriotic InternationalistNumber 132 February 2016 €1.50

IN THIS ISSUECapitalist competition Page 2Islamic state Page 4Bímis dílis d’idéil 1916! Page 5EU and the left Page 6Bob Doyle Page 7Thomas Piketty Page 8Seán Murray Page 8Letter from Havana Page 10Poetry competition Page 12

The current election campaignand the election of a new Dáil

present new challengesand opportunities for theworking people of Ireland.

We have experiencedprolonged attacks on our livingstandards, on social welfare

benefits, pensions, and publicservices, as well as the

imposition of water charges.

politics

Working people need to look longand hard at what is being presented tothem in the manifestos and electionmaterials dropping in their doors. Whatdo they really mean? Who stands tobenefit the most, and who will lose themost? What do the plethora of politicalparties, the alliances and the hundredsof candidates presenting themselves asindependents really stand for?

Do the policies of those askingfor your vote advance the demandfor national independence, forgreater political and economicsovereignty, for the weakening ofthe power of capital over workers?Are they in favour of the peoplebeing sovereign and of alleconomic, political, cultural andsocial decisions resting fully withthe people? Do they accept thatthe needs of the people are primaryand that economic activity must bea servant of the people?A useful guide by which to judge

those seeking your vote is the politicalpositions outlined by the Right2Changemovement. With these principles as aguide, it’s clear that the three mainparties—Fine Gael, the Labour Party,and Fianna Fáil—are subservient to theTroika, to the policies being imposed bythe European Union and tointernational corporations and theirinterests. These parties will continue toplace the Irish working people in asubservient position; so a vote for anyof them is a vote for continuing withthe same subservient policies and forpermanent austerity.Even some within Right2Change

need to be questioned and not takenat face value. Some backward andreactionary forces have latched on toRight2Water and Right2Change tomask their reactionary politics, as wellas opportunist forces only too willing tosteal the people’s anger and steer itinto a cul de sac, into the swamp ofelectoral politics.Working people should vote for

parties and independents that have arecord of working in the interests ofworking people, fighting to defendworkers’ rights, that have a clear andunambiguous opposition to the EU andthat will oppose TTIP.Where the CPI is standing we ask for

your support, based on our record ofopposition to the odious bank debt andour demand, from the very start, forthe repudiation of this debt; on ourprincipled and unambiguous oppositionto the European Union over manydecades; on our opposition to watercharges and our political support forthe central demand of a constitutional

amendment guaranteeing the people’sownership of water as well as all ournatural resources.Elections are in the main a

barometer of where the class is and itsunderstanding of events around them.A purely electoral strategy at theexpense of the mobilising of workingpeople in defence of their interests willdeliver little. We need to think beyondelections and to see what type ofsociety we want and what our classneeds are. We need to build working-class organisations, from communitystructures to our trade unions. Havingstrong working-class organisations is anexpression of the potential of our ownpolitical power.Do not be distracted by the political

opportunism and political sectarianismthat pervades much of the left. Theinterests of such groups are not thesame as the interests of our class.The fetters imposed on us by

external political and economic forcescan be challenged and broken only bya working class that is organised anddetermined and has a clearunderstanding of where it needs togo—by a people with pride in ourhistory of struggle and resistanceagainst imperialism, proud of ourculture and language. For a decentsociety to exist we need an Irelandbuilt on the principles of solidarity,equality, sharing, and caring, to bringthe working-class principle of “an injuryto one is the concern of all” into thevery heart of our society—a countrywhere we have national independenceand political and economic sovereignty.The resistance and mass

mobilisation against water charges hasgiven us a picture of what is possiblewhen we are organised. We need to gofurther and begin to shape our owndestiny. Working people must take realownership of our country.

Socialist Voice page 2

Within the EuropeanUnion and the United

States and otheradvanced capitalistregions they say

competition is king.Competition is what gives

the modern marketeconomy its legitimacy.

When capitalist

competitionis king

CORK NORTH WESTCOMMUNISTMICHAEL O’DONNELL

Socialist Voice page 3

capitalism

Eoghan O’Neill

IT’S TAUGHT in second-leveland third-level educationalinstitutions, in departments of

economics, business, and law. It’s nearly so ingrained that

competition equates to commonsense. When you have a market inwhich to sell goods and services, weare told, competition between firmsguarantees the most efficient andmost equitable system of distribution.The needs of the whole society aretherefore determined by the marketsystem functioning as an unbiasedfacilitator.The more a person wants

something, the more they are willing topay for it; and the more people arewilling to pay for something, the moreof that item will be supplied, and socompetition ensues between firmstrying to meet a demand. The morecompetition there is the more the pricegets driven down, as each competitorin the market will undercut the othersto get a slice of the action.This will only go on until a break-

even point is reached, where the costof supply equals that of the incomegained. It will no longer be viable forfurther competitors to enter themarket, as any price above or belowthis point will see a firm out ofbusiness. This whole process is thepinnacle for the economist and isknown as “perfect competition.”Perfect competition, however, is now

an illusory concept. It possibly hadsome form of relevance in the 1800s,when the factory system was in itsinfancy; but in today’s economy, withthe dominance of monopolies,oligopolies, cartels, collusion, mergers,acquisitions, and unequal wealthdistribution, this type of theory is forthe fairy-tale series of Hans ChristianAndersen.Amazingly, despite the reality, this

remains the foundation stone ofmodern economic theory. It is thenormative that economists use tojustify their continued belief in thecapitalist market system.Economists know that perfect

competition in any industry is as rareas a summer snowfall, yet despite thisthey hold it as the bar to be reachedin every industry. The problem is thatno company or firm—which, by law,must be a profit-maximising firm—willwant a large number of competitors intheir industry, because of the forcingdown of prices and therefore profits, topotentially a point of no long-termeconomic profit.

Firms will therefore use aggressivetactics to see other competitors out ofbusiness and create huge barriers tostop other competitors entering themarket. This has happened in virtuallyall types of industry, from tobacco toretailers, from motors to aviation, fromoil to pharmaceuticals, and everythingin between.A contradiction ensues, in that

competition drives firms towardsmonopoly, yet economists strivetowards “perfect competition.” There isonly going to be one winner here, andit isn’t the economist. In the long runthe only way to secure large or super-profits is to monopolise or take aposition of monopoly power (that is, allor a large portion of the market share).If it’s impossible to get rid of all thecompetition, then an “understanding”will be reached by the competitors.This, known generally as “gametheory,” gives an incentive for price-fixing, collusion, and cartels.Coca-Cola and Pepsi, as a historical

example, were involved, and continueto be involved, in a marketing war towin over the market share; but theydidn’t engage in an all-out price war,because they knew that that wouldlower profits in the soft-drinks industrygenerally. Industry leaders, even thosewithin the same industry, know thatcompetition can be healthy, but not atthe expense of potential profit, and sowon’t engage in an all-out price warwith each other, as it does not benefitthe owners, the shareholders, and thewhole array of capitalist beneficiaries.This is a fundamental aspect of the

capitalist system. It is not oneindividual capitalist, one that mightfavour fair trade or pay above-averagewages, that drives the system; but thesystem as a whole runs on profitmaximisation.So what makes being in a monopoly

or oligopoly industry so desirable?

1They are price-makers.Theyset the price or the quantity

supplied that, through theircalculations, will maximise profits. Soin an industry such as pharmaceuticalsthe need or demand for a certain drugor vaccine will not trump the price orquantity that will maximise profit, withobvious negative consequences.

2They are the only show intown. If a company, or companies

that are colluding, are the only oneproducing or providing a product orservice, they are the ones that dictatewhat amount gets sold. They canrestrict supply, creating a false

demand, driving up prices. They dictatewhat is to be produced, when, andwhere. For example, the energycompanies will continue to hold backcheap, renewable energy sources solong as they can make huge profitsfrom our dependence on fossil fuels.

3Long-term profits. Movingtowards a monopolised industry is

the only way to guarantee profits in thelong run, as large-scale competitiondrives down prices and profits.So how do we make sense of all

this? There is an all-embracing agendaof the capitalist class forces that,since the dismantling of the socialistgovernments and economic systems,has really been unleashed. The driveof competition has been used as a veilto disguise the privatisation agenda.Competition no longer benefits the

prices of goods and services forordinary working people but serves theinterest of the industrial and financialowners: the capitalist class. It servesas a means of justification forcapitalism, without which it would beimpossible to convince people thatprivate health, education, housing,infrastructure and industry in general isthe best way to organise society. Thereis a long-term strategic goal to see allpublicly owned industries, services andresources sold, stripped, and openedto competition to the private sector.Once these are opened to

competition, the wheels ofmonopolisation will already be turning.When you don’t have competitiondriving down prices in essentialservices, then with falling incomes,debt, and growing inequality, demandwon’t count so much as one’s abilityand willingness to pay. The needs ofthe people in health, education,housing, services, jobs and recreationare in fact the real prize, the cash cow,that capitalists are seeking to own indeveloped economies.It is essential that working people

grasp this and begin joining the dotsbetween Irish Water, refuse collection,gas and electricity supply, and otherpublic industries and services thathave been sold and privatised, or thatthe state will try to sell and privatise inthe future. There is no doubt that thisis happening at the national and theinternational level. How we defeat it isanother matter and can’t be dealt withhere.They say competition is king; but the

king has no clothes, and what lurksbeneath is naked capitalism. All itwants, all it ever wants, is to own thewealth of nations.

Debt: a weapon against thepeople €3.50/£3

The BloodyTrail ofImperialism by Eddie Glackin€8/£6

The Marxism of James Connollyby ThomasMetscher€3.50/£2.50

Order fromConnolly Books43 East EssexStreet, Dublin,between TempleBar andParliament Street(01) 6708707 connollybooks@eircon.n

Socialist Voice page 4

He compared the situation to that ofthe Spanish Civil War; he justifiedsupport for British intervention asbeing the same as support for theInternational Brigades that supportedthe Spanish Republic. Nothing couldbe further from the truth.A number of issues arise from

Benn’s statement. The first and mostobvious is that the republicangovernment in Spain in the 1930s wasdemocratically elected. Fascists, led byGeneral Franco, refused to accept therepublic. He sought to restore thesystem as it was before the Republic,a system of landlordism and privilegefor capitalists. In this the Francoistswere supported by fascist governmentsin Germany and Italy. The ruling classin Britain in the 1930s was, in themain, pro-fascist.The only support received by the

republican government in Spain camefrom the Soviet Union and theInternational Brigades. Britain, Franceand the League of Nations refused togive any support, despite the fact thatthe fascist governments of Italy andGermany were giving support toFranco.The International Brigades were

volunteers from more than fiftycountries—including Germany andItaly—who were willing to sacrificetheir own lives in the defence of

democracy. In the main they werecommunists, who saw the war inSpain as the first stage in a muchbigger conflict in the war againstfascism.To claim that the bombing of Islamic

State by the British air force iscomparable to the InternationalBrigades defending democracy is naïveat best and sophistry at worst. Theonly people bombing civilians duringthe Spanish civil war were the fascistLuftwaffe.Benn is not the first social democrat

to use the International Brigades as anexcuse for bombing civilians. EdMiliband, the previous leader of theBritish Labour Party, also advocatedbombing Libya during that country’scivil war.Islamic State is a breakaway from Al

Qa‘ida. When the Soviet Union wasfighting the Taliban in Afghanistan fromthe late 1970s onwards the USimperialists not only armed the Talibanbut also brought in Arab fighters tosupport the Afghanis.Following the invasion of Iraq by the

imperialist forces of the United Statesand Britain, they excluded Ba‘ath partymembers from government. In 2006the “Islamic State of Iraq” wasfounded, subsequently renamed ISIS.It originally drew its support from theSunni minority in Iraq, who werealienated from the Shi‘a-dominatedgovernment set up by the imperialistoccupiers. It also attracted remnantsof the secular Ba‘ath party.In Syria the Sunni uprising against

the ruling Alawis (a Shi‘a offshoot)enabled ISIS to expand into Syria. Atfirst ISIS had military success, but

once the Kurds began receivingmilitary support, the Kurdish fightersin effect brought an end to ISISexpansion.

Engels drew a contrastbetween Islam and Christianity.The former is essentiallyconservative in nature and seeksto either preserve the status quoor revert to an idealistic versionof reality. Engels made the pointthat all these movements are clothedin religion but they have theirsource in economic causes; andyet, even when they arevictorious, they allow the oldeconomic conditions to persistuntouched. So the old situationremains unchanged and thecollision recurs periodically. Inthe popular risings of theChristian West, on the contrary,the religious disguise is only aflag and a mask for attacks onan economic order which isbecoming antiquated. This isfinally overthrown, a new onearises and the world progresses.This is essentially the situation

today. The problem for the imperialistsis that Iraq, Syria and other states inthe region all arose out of the OttomanEmpire and were the products ofartificial borders created by secretagreements expressed in the Sykes-Picot pact, exposed by the SovietUnion. The borders of these countriesestablished as British or Frenchmandates at the end of the First WorldWar are fairly arbitrary, and aredesigned to exclude Iran as the maincountry in the region.The Kurds were excluded from

nationhood but have a presence inIraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria. They aretherefore a problem. Countries likeSaudi Arabia and the other Gulf statesare the main supporters of ISIS.Turkey is more interested in fightingthe Kurds than fighting ISIS. Britainand the United States have more ofan interest in maintaining the presentsituation than in forcing their clientstates in the region to withdrawsupport from ISIS.At the end of the day, maintaining

the profit levels of monopoly capital byaccess to cheap oil and by supplyingweapons is more important to theUnited States and Britain thandefeating ISIS. The victims of terrorismin Paris or the Yazidi victims of ISIS arejust collateral damage, despite thecrocodile tears of the state-monopolycapitalists.

Alan Hanlon

HILLARY BENN, the British Labour Party’sshadow foreign secretary, made a strikingstatement in the House of Commons in the

debate on British intervention in the civil war nowtaking place in Syria.

Islamic state andcrocodile tears

imperialism

Ní chluinfear teagasc sóisialachShéamais Uí Chonaíle á mholadh ónambéala siadsan, ar ndóigh. Bíodhspléachadh againn ar chuid decháipéisí bunúsacha ghluaiseacht nasaoirse le méid na feille seo athomhas.Seo leagan Gaeilge de mhír as

Forógra na Cásca, ar léigh Pádraig MacPiarais an bunleagan Béarla de amachtaobh amuigh d’Ard-Oifig an Phoist imBaile Átha Cliath, Luan Cásca 1916.Dearbhaíonn muid gur ceartceannasach dochloíte é ceartmhuintir na hÉireann chun seilbh nahÉireann agus chun dála nahÉireann a stiúradh gan srian. Níorchealaigh an forlámhas a d’imir cineagus rialtas eachtrannach ar feadh ibhfad an ceart sin, ná ní féidir é achealú go deo ach amháin trídhíothú mhuintir na hÉireann.Fós féin, shéan muintir na hÉireann,

agus iad scanraithe ag bagairtíghíománaigh na hÉireann is na hEorpa,don cheart céanna nuair a ghlacadar leConradh Liospóin (2009). Ghiorraighsin le flaithiúnas Phoblacht 26contaetha na hÉireann. D’fheall anRialtas athuair ar mhuintir na hÉireannsa bhliain 2010 nuair a lig sé don IMFagus don Aontas Eorpach iachall achur uirthi díol as fiacha bainc nárbhain léi.Sa chéad sheisiún de Dháil Éireann,

ar 21 Eanáir 1919, léadh an Clár OibrePoblachtach, inar iomlánaíodh rúnsóisialta Fhorógra na Cásca. B’sheo an

chéad uair—agus an uairdheireanach—inar reachtáladh obairuilig Dháil Éireann, an Clár seo sanáireamh, trí Ghaeilge amháin.Sna míreanna seo a leanas de,

cuirtear feoil ar idéil na Cásca.Dearbhaíonn muid, i mbriathrafhorógra Shaorstáit Éireann, go bhfuilsé de cheart ag muintir na hÉireannseilbh na hÉireann a bheith acu aguscinniúint an náisiúin a bheith faoinariar, agus nach féidir an ceart san dobhaint uathu. Faoi mar dúirt árgcéad Uachtarán, Pádraig MacPhiarais, “dearbhaíonn muid gurceart go mbeadh . . . ábhar maoinena hÉireann faoi riaradh an náisiúin,idir thalamh agus ghustal nahÉireann, gach saghas maoine agusgach gléas chun maoin a sholáthardá bhfuil san tír”; agus athfhógraíonnmuid an rud d’fhógair an Piarsachgur dual go mbeadh tosach ag ceartan phobail chun leasa an phobail archeart an duine chun seilbhe faoileith.Ní réitíonn an t-idéal sóisialach seo

le ballraíocht Phoblacht 26-Co. nahÉireann san AE nua-liobrálach seo athugann tús áite do bhancanna israchmasóirí iasachta thar leas nabpobal, agus ina mbíonn maoin gachtíre, Poblacht na hÉireann sanáireamh, ina ábhar spairne ag narachmasóirí céanna. Tagann anréimeas seo salach go hiomlán aroidhreacht na Cásca.Cúram eile a bheadh ar an stát

Éireannach nua de réir an Chlár Oibreseo náféachaint chuige nach mbeidh ant-ocras ná an fuacht ag goilliúint araon leanbh cheal bídh, éadaigh nádíon tí; ach go bhfaighidh siad gachcóir agus gléas is gá dhóibh chunteagasc agus taithí ceart a thabhairt

dóibh i gcóir na hoibre a bheidh ledéanamh acu mar chomhaltaí denSaorstát Gaelach.Fógraítear go bhfuil an t�ocras ag

bagairt ar suas le 30 faoin gcéad denphobal abhus i mbliana—is go bhfuilméadú as éadan ar líon na saoránachgan díon ná dídean, clanna iomlánaina measc. An mhí seo caite féin léirighsuirbhé a choimisiúnaigh an RoinnSláinte go dtugann 20 faoin gcéad depháistí na hÉireann an leapa nó anscoil orthu féin agus iad ocrach (IrishIndependent, 10 Nollaig 2015.) Seocomhartha eile go bhfuil bun-idéal seona Poblachta caite i dtraipisí ag árn-aicmí ceannais. Maidir le “SaorstátGaelach,” tá a bhfuil fágtha denGhaeltacht ar an dé deiridh agusstádas siombalach amháin ag annGaeilge féin i saol poiblí na tíre.Maítear freisin i gClár Oibre na Céad

Dála:Beidh sé de dhualgas orainn cabhrúle méadú ghustal an náisiúin, antalamh a dhéanamh níos torthúlaagus níos ionsaothraithe; mianachna hÉireann, a portaigh mhóna, acuid iascaigh, a bealaigh uisce agusa cuanta do chur chun críche i ceartchun tairbhe mhuintir na hÉireann.Ach is seanscéal é go bhfuil maoin

aiceanta na hÉireann (m.sh. uisce) ápríobháidiú, áiseanna náisiúntaleictreacha agus leictreonacha sanáireamh, agus saothrú na bportach ábhac ag an AE. Baineann 23 faoingcéad d’fharraigí an AE le hÉirinn, achtá an sciar den mhargadh idirnáisiúntaatá ceadaithe d’Éirinn i bhfad faoi bhunan chéatadáin sin. Fágann sé sin oll-bhac ar fhorbairt an tionscail iascaighabhus agus an buntáiste uilig agnáisiúin na mbád monarchan ascuabann suas an t-iasc nach bhfuilceadaithe dár gcuid iascairí féin abhaint ónár bhfarraigí féin.Tuige ar thug, agus a thugann,

muintir na hÉireann cúl le hidéil 1916?Is cuid den fhreagra é gur bheartaighaicmí ceannais na tíre trí Chogadh namBráthar, 1922–23, idéil uaislesóisialta agus cultúrtha na Poblachta abhascadh. Tá an fhrith-réabhlóid seo arsiúl i gcónaí, mar a léiríonn áitthánaisteach féinsásta na tíre seo inAE seo an nua-liobrálachais. Sa bhliainatá romhainn cluinfear oidhrí aos seoan fhrithghnímh ag sárú a chéile aguslaochra 1916 á gcomóradh go fuíochis go fimíneach acu. Ach tapóidhsóisialaithe agus daonlathaitheComóradh 1916 lena ndílseacht bhuana dhearbhú d’aidhmeanna cultúrthaagus sóisialta lucht an Éirí Amach, atále baint amach fós.Tá obair mhór romhainn!

Socialist Voice page 5

Ireland

Bímis dílis d’idéil 1916!

Tomás Mac Síomóin

I mbliain seo chomóradh Éirí Amach 1916cluinfear moltaí á dtabhairt go fuíoch ag boic nabunaíochta do laochra na Cásca. Ach tá ard-chuspóirí na laoch céanna tréigthe, is faoi their, agna boic chéanna le fada an lá.

Something similar may happen inthe North of Ireland as a result ofboorish statements from seniormembers of the DUP, who prefer tocriticise a hapless Taoiseach than towrestle with austerity-inflicting Tories.While it is possible to understand

the resulting resentment, it would beshort-sighted not to deliver a better-judged verdict on the real nature andpurpose of the European Union duringDavid Cameron’s “in-out” referendum.It would also be an unforgivableblunder to allow the far right todominate an argument that socialistscannot ignore.Moreover, the EU is in the throes of

a series of crises that may welldetermine much of Europe for decadesto come.The European Union, from its

foundation, has been a structuredesigned to facilitate capitalism and topromote imperialist objectives. Whenoriginally set up in the 1950s as the

Common Market it had as its primarypurpose the creation of economic co-operation between western Europeanstates hostile to the Soviet Union. Inspite of adopting a social-democraticprogramme in its early phase, it had aclear but unspoken objective ofcurtailing socialism.Many on the left recognised the

institution for what it was and drewattention (with disappointingly littleimpact) to the threat posed by thepresence of NATO coupled to apolitical bloc fundamentally committedto maintaining free-market economies.Two main factors accounted for the

left’s lack of influence. Fearing theinfluence of the USSR, coupled withthe impact of post-war westernEuropean communist parties, theruling elite made strategic concessionsto the working class. This, togetherwith a raised standard of livingachieved by the super-exploitation ofthe Third World, meant that for manyyears Europe’s rulers were able tocontain discontent.For reasons well known to readers of

Socialist Voice, the EU’s ruling elitehas retreated over the past fourdecades from the post-war social-democratic arrangement. Morerecently, attacks on workers’ livingstandards have intensified under aneo-liberal agenda. As circumstances

have changed, the widespreadtolerance, if not quite approval, thatonce existed for the EU amongEurope’s working class has comeunder significant challenge.The reasons for growing

disenchantment are not hard to find.Capitalist free markets bring with themthe inevitability of crises, such as thattriggered by the collapse of LehmanBrothers in 2008. By enforcing thefiscal and monetary straitjacketresulting in particular from the treatiesof Maastricht and Lisbon, the EUorchestrated an era of austerity as aresponse to the financial crash andsubsequent recession.The result for working-class

communities in many parts of Europehas ranged from painful to calamitous.Unemployment rose steeply in Ireland,Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, and Greece,and the hard-won social welfare safetynet was cut to the bone. Most hurtfulis the growing realisation that thissituation is not a temporary aberrationbut is the new standard.Not surprisingly, the enforcement of

neo-liberal policies has causedresentment, and new, though oftendisjointed, protest movements haveemerged in many countries, includingIreland. Nor is the discontent confinedto the so-called peripheral countries. Aradical movement opposed to theTransatlantic Trade and InvestmentPartnership¹ has grown in strength inGermany over the past few years andrecently staged one of the largestdemonstrations ever seen in thatcountry.Against this background of

discontent with the economicmanagement of the EU, conservatives(and not just the far right) throughoutthe continent are stirring up hysteriaagainst the waves of refugees fleeingwar in the Middle East.So concerned are some

establishment-leaning commentatorsthat they are going so far as tosuggest that these difficulties may leadto the break-up of the EuropeanUnion. Prof. Mark Mazower, writing inthe Financial Times, said: “The unionfaces a deep crisis of institutionallegitimacy.”² He listed the main areasof contention as high rates of youthunemployment, secular stagnation,and disagreement over refugees,leading possibly to a collapse of theSchengen agreement. The professordidn’t include a British exit from theEU, but he might well have.In spite of the problems confronting

EU heads of government and theirbureaucrats, there is little doubt that

Socialist Voice page 6

sovereignty

Tommy McKearney

IT IS BEING reported that some Scots intendvoting Yes in the British referendum dealingwith Britain’s membership of the European

Union. Apparently their decision is based on therather shaky principle that if a significantnumber of English people wish to leave, they willvote to remain

EU membership: a challenge tothe serious left

our heroes

Socialist Voice page 7

the current European ruling class willstrive to maintain an entity that hasserved it well for so long. Moreover,present indications are that they willendeavour to do so by moving furtherto the right. Using increasinglyauthoritarian methods, whetherfinancial, fiscal, or armed force, theywill hope to simultaneouslyoutmanoeuvre both the populist rightand meandering social democrats.There are already clear signs thatleading EU governments are employingincreasingly reactionary and anti-democratic practices.In the light of this it has to be stated

that the EU is not going through atemporary phase of turbulence thatcan and will be corrected if and when,that “better and improved policies areadopted if the right people are put inplace.” The EU is not like adysfunctional family that can beimproved by the application of therapyand a measure of good advice. The EUis doing what it was designed to do,and will continue doing so unless anduntil it is replaced by a differentconstruction.The forthcoming referendum

promised by David Cameron providesthe serious left with a challenge thatcannot be avoided. With heightenedinterest in the debate, it is importantto avail of an opportunity to makepeople throughout Ireland aware of thenature and purpose of the EU andsimultaneously to offer a realisticsocialist alternative. It is crucial,therefore, that the debate doesn’t getsidetracked into secondary issues orbecome distorted by right-wing,xenophobic ranting (nor that anyoneshould support the EU because thatmight annoy the DUP).A century after the 1916 Rising it

would be timely and important toremind Irish people that control by theEU of monetary and fiscal policy, and agrowing military commitment, areincompatible with the existence of a“sovereign, independent state”capable of defending the well-being ofits citizens.It might also be timely to rework an

old adage from that revolutionary eraand point out that the EU’s difficultiescould and should become anopportunity for the working class inIreland and abroad. As a first step weneed to engage energetically in thedebate, providing a left critique of theEU that emphasises its core functionand worrying future developments. Asalways, any critique also requires theoutline of the realistic alternativeoffered by socialism.

Rebel without a pauseBob Doyle (1916–2009)

1 Lee Williams,“What is TTIP? Andsix reasons whythe answer shouldscare you,”Independent(London), 6October 2015(http://ind.pn/1vKDnyU).

2 Mark Mazower,“Lessons from thepast are key toEurope’s survival,”Financial Times,23 January 2016.

Paul Doran

THE CENTENARY of BobDoyle’s birth occurs on 12February. He was born into

poverty in North King Street,Dublin, and the eventual break-upof his family led to a life of fostercare and orphanages, where hesuffered hunger and regularbeatings.He emerged as a teenager to the

misery and unemployment of 1930sDublin. He shared a flat with a veteranof the War of Independence, KitConway. He followed Kit into the ranksof the IRA and was involved in manystreet battles with Eoin O’Duffy’s fascistBlueshirts (shortly to merge with FineGael, of which O’Duffy became the firstleader), during one of which Bob lostthe sight in his left eye.Like Conway, he became disillusioned

with the direction being taken by theIRA, feeling that they wereconcentrating all their efforts onreuniting Ireland without the vision ofthe republic. He felt there was nobenefit to the Irish people from this ifthe same gombeen-capitalist class werestill running the state; and so he joinedthe Communist Party of Ireland andthen became involved in the RepublicanCongress.With the broadening of his political

views he decided to go to fight indefence of the Spanish Republicagainst Franco’s fascists and theirGerman and Italian allies. After severalattempts to reach Spain he eventually

arrived in late 1937 and went straightinto action on the Aragón front, histraining in the IRA serving him well. Hesaw heavy action against incredibleodds in the battle of Belchite and waseventually captured, along with FrankRyan and others, by Italian fascists,and remained a prisoner for elevenmonths. During his incarceration hesuffered regular and brutal torture atthe hands of Italian, Spanish andGerman fascists.He was released in a prisoner swap

in early 1939. He made his way backto London, where he met and marriedhis Spanish wife, Lola. He joined themerchant navy and served with it till theend of the Second World War. After thewar he became active again in politicswith the Communist Party and theConnolly Association.He got a job in the printing industry

and became a leading member of thetrade union SOGAT and led manycampaigns and strikes to improve payand conditions for workers.Bob continued to fight against

injustice throughout his life. He wasalways willing to lend a helping handand share his experience with youngactivists and never tired of travellingnear and far to commemorate his fallencomrades of the International Brigades.Bob was a very brave, principled and

courageous communist who sufferedextreme hardships of all kindsthroughout his long life but remainedwilling and determined in his fight forsocialism and a better world right tothe end.

Mural dedicated to Bob Doyle at the Cobblestone Bar, North KingStreet, Stoneybatter. Unveiled 7 October 2012. The mural wasoriginally on the outside of the building (as pictured) but, becauseof planning restrictions, has since been moved to inside

books

Socialist Voice page 8

Thomas Piketty, Capital in theTwenty-FirstCenturyCambridge(Mass.): BelknapPress, 2014;€25.

Bernard Murphy

THOMAS PIKETTY’S CapitalIn the Twenty-First Century,published in English

translation in 2014, made theNew York Times best-seller list.In the book Piketty, a professorof political economy at theUniversity of Paris, details theenormous accumulation ofcapitalist profit and the originsof the state-supported financialoligarchies in advanced capitalistcountries over the last thirtyyears.He does this without broaching its

motive force: the promotion of MiltonFriedman’s economic policies byRonald Reagan in the United Statesand by Margaret Thatcher in Britain.These policies hegemonisedeconomies on both sides of theAtlantic, that of Ireland included, andled to the unprecedented capitalaccumulations in capitalist coffers.Piketty was criticised in the United

States by capitalist apologists andmedia, such as the Wall StreetJournal, which defined his tract as“communist.” He put liberal and neo-liberal economists on the defensive,demolishing their idea that neo-liberal

taxation policies are necessary forgrowth and creating wealth. Heblames the current socio-economicdownturn on precisely those policies,showing that economic growth rateswere greater between 1932 and 1980than between 1980 and 2008, whentaxes on capital and high earningswere much lower than in the earlierperiod.But Capital in the Twenty-First

Century virtually ignores the capitalistexploitation of labour, central toMarxist political economy. Piketty seescapital accumulation andconcentration as being largely intrinsicto the nature of capital itself andunrelated to conditions (wagesincluded) in the work-place. Yetconditions in the latter have beenundergoing a continuing deteriorationsince the 1980s.Growth in salaries in the United

States was less during the years1980–2009 than in 1950–1980,contrasting with spectacular increasesin capital’s rate of profit over theformer period (Jack Rasmus, ZCommunications, 1 May 2014).Income from work, as a proportion ofnational income, fell from 56 per centin 1983 to 52 per cent in 2007,when the crisis reached its peak, andhas now fallen to a (still falling) 49per cent.Average family income fell

accordingly, losing 10 per cent of itsacquisitive value. Well-paid jobs ($14per hour) were replaced by low-paidlabour ($7.64 per hour). Part-timelabour and precariousness becamethe norm throughout the entire neo-liberal order. Meanwhile, income fromcapital jumped well ahead of that fromlabour. Why?The period following the Second

World War, from 1945 to 1980, wasmarked by a social pact between theowners and managers of capital andthe workers, fronted by their politicalrepresentatives and trade unions.Thence, income from work (as aproportion of total earnings) reachedbetween 70 and 75 per cent ofnational income on both sides of theAtlantic. The welfare state emergedand expanded, thanks to working-class power. Scandinavia, whereworking-class clout was strongest, ledthis tendency.Reagan and Thatcher, aided by the

collapse of the socialist bloc, reversedthese advances. They aimed torecuperate the power of capital andweaken labour. Alan Budd, economicadviser to Thatcher, stated clearly thatthe neo-liberal measures adopted byher government were to increaseunemployment in order to reduce thepower of the working class, whichwould permit a reduction in salaries,with a corresponding increase in the

Das Kapital Mark 2?

Nick Wright

SEÁN BYERS’ biography isremarkable not just for itsaccount of the singular

nature of Seán Murray’s role inIrish politics but for its focus onthe specifically Irish conditionswhich shaped his revolutionarypolitics. In this it contrasts most sharply with

Mike Milotte’s book1, which negates itsscholarship with a hopelesslyundialectical attempt to fit Irish realityinto a schema drawn from theconvergence of conventional bourgeoisand Trotskyite conceptions whichinvariably place Moscow’s direction asthe critical factor in shaping events.Seán Murray was Ireland’s foremost

professional revolutionary. Hailing fromthe strongly Republican Glens of Antrimin this traditionally Unionist county, hewas active the IRA’s Antrim Brigade in

the Irish War of Independence, was anexceptional student at the Comintern’sLenin school, became a pivotal figurein the republican, labour andcommunist movements, was active inthe 1932 Outdoor Relief strike and thethwarted Republican Congress, andwas general secretary of the Irish partyfrom its effective foundation to 1941.Barred from the North of Ireland, of

necessity, he became a central figurein Dublin with important connectionsoutside Ireland, with strong links withBritish communists, central tomobilising the Irish contingent of theInternational Brigades in Spain andconnected politically and personallywith the main personalities of the Irishrevolutionary movement.Seán Byers argues that Murray was

able, in exceptionally straitenedcircumstances, to provide effectiveleadership in conditions which did notalways fit well with the theoreticalpostulates and practical directions ofthe Comintern.Byers’ book deserves a more

detailed consideration than is possiblehere, but both British and Irish readers

will understand why it is important toconsider the notion — exemplified byEmmet O’Connor’s account 2 — thatthe impact of the Comintern on Irishcommunist organisation wasfundamental and largely positive, andthat while the Irish party endured acomplex and difficult relationship withthe international communist hierarchy,like its British counterpart, it remainedan integral part of that internationalmovement necessarily subject to theComintern’s democratic centralism.Seán Murray was the Irish figure mostintimately and loyally involved with theinternational leadership.It is undoubtedly true that the “class

against class” interlude — which wasgrounded in the chauvinism, classcollaboration and bloody counter-revolutionary betrayals of socialdemocracy and conditioned by thefailure of a generalised Europeanrevolutionary tide — erected somebarriers to the alliance of communistsand republicans. But the conventionalcharacterisation here of this period asa “narrowly sectarian and self defeatingtactic” is misplaced. This was the era

Seán Murray’s life,seen from Britain

Seán ByersSeán Murray MarxistLeninist andIrish SocialistRepublicanSallinsCo Kildare 2004

profitability of capital (Observer, 21June 1992)—a classic example of thecapitalist exploitation of Marx’s“reserve army of the unemployed”!As the oft-quoted American

billionaire Warren Buffet put it, “Sure,there is a class war in this country.And my class, the rich, are winning itevery day.” (New York Times, 26November 2006.)The central question Piketty doesn’t

ask: Is the enormous concentration ofcapital and its profits over the lastthirty years—accentuated during theyears of recession—directly related toa corresponding collapse in labourearnings? The first can hardly beexplained without the second. Marxtaught that the continuingaccumulation of capitalist wealth isdue to the exploitation of continuallyrising labour productivity. Theenormous power of capital—with itscorresponding political influence—explains why most of this wealth iscaptured by the owners and managersof capital and not by those who createit.The exploitation of labour reaches

record levels during the present crisis.During the Clinton presidency, from1993 to 2000, 45 per cent of thewealth created in the United Stateswas stolen by 1 per cent of thepopulation, rising to 65 per cent

during the Bush presidency (2001–2008) and to 95 per cent during theObama era. Such variation in thedistribution of the social product canbe understood only in the context ofthis abusive capital-labour relationship.The huge salaries that the non-

productive, parasitic 1 per cent givethe managers of its riches—bankers,higher executives, speculation wizards,casino adepts, etc.—greatly distortnational salary averages. They thushide the substantial salary decreasesand impoverishment of the operatorsof the productive economy, theworking class. The inordinate growth inthe earnings of the former group is themajor cause of current economicinstability.The generating of mega-profits from

the productive economy is due neitherto sales increases nor to price risesbut to the enormous reduction inproduction costs, above all labourcosts—exploitation, in short. Forexample, productivity per worker in theUnited States increased by 80 percent between 1973 and 2011, butthe worker’s hourly salary rose by only4 per cent. But you will search Capitalin the Twenty First Century in vain forthe word “exploitation.”Socio-political imperatives mandated

by these facts go far beyond the fixproposed by Piketty: a Tobin tax on

international financial transactions toaugment social spending. But such ahighly desirable step would need to beaccompanied by major increases inreturns on productive work, salaryincreases, and greatly expanded socialexpenditure to ensure the health andcultural well-being of working peopleand guarantee the basic human rights(as defined by the UN Charter onHuman Rights) of all citizens.Strong popular demands for such

measures, ignored in capitalism’sdecision-making centres, would rockthe foundations of the existing neo-liberal order. Rallying around themwould bring a popular movement intosharp conflict with the realities of theEU and the capitalist state. But, mostimportantly, in the context of suchstruggle the outlines of an alternativeand humane social order—socialism—would come gradually into focus. Thiswould be seen by increasing numbersof working people as the only viablealternative to the present toxic socialorder, which destroys democracy andreduces them to serfs.Such messy perspectives of popular

struggle form no part of the elegant,mathematically configured socio-economic landscape described byThomas Piketty in his otherwisestimulating Capital in the Twenty-FirstCentury.

in which national sections of theComintern made the transition to well-organised parties with deep roots inthe working class and a strongemphasis on political education,factory organisation, centralised andleadership and internationalism. It wasthe essential preparation for the battlesthat lay ahead.Despite the severe practical,

ideological and political constraints, theparty, small and persecuted as it was,became even more deeply embeddedin working-class politics both sides ofthe border and played a critical antifascist role. Alas we are not spared the dreary

parade of bourgeois and ultra-leftpieties about the Moscow Trials, thedefence of the Spanish Republic, thecounter-revolutionary role of Trotskyand his followers. The idea that, in a situation in which

only the Soviet Union had stood withRepublican Spain, when the bourgeoispowers, Britain foremost, werepromoting a Nazi-Soviet conflict, that itwas possible for any Comintern affiliateto detach itself from solidarity with the

Soviet Union was and is a fantasy.Stalin’s tactic, faced with the

unwillingness of the bourgeois powersto make a stand against Hitler, to buytime and territory with the non-aggession treaty with Germany,inevitably confused some; butthroughout the Phoney War period itwas their shared anti-imperialism whichenabled British and Irish communistsalike to see the working through ofinter-imperialist contradictions andsharpen the campaign for immediateworking-class interests.Byers observes that in late 1939 the

Belfast group organised a rally tooppose Northern Ireland’s involvementin the British war effort, initiated, itsaid, primarily “for the fruits ofEmpire.” Thus Belfast communistswent to jail for possessing illegal copiesof the party’s Red Hand, which hadbeen banned, alongside the CPGB’sDaily Worker and Claud Cockburn’s TheWeek.Inevitably, during the Phoney War

interlude the political and economicintegration of the North with Britainpresented special difficulties for the

Belfast comrades, although, deeplyembedded in the industrial workingclass, they were able to strengthentheir trade union influence.The 1941 Nazi invasion of the Soviet

Union changed the nature of the war.As in Britain, class contradictions in theNorth were subordinated to the wareffort, production greatly expanded,and wages rose. A measure of workerparticipation emerged with theestablishment of factory jointproduction committees. Thus began aperiod of organisational growth for theNorthern communists, while in Dublinindependent activity was suspended.The reformist illusions that arose in

the post-war period inevitablychallenged the CPGB’s bedrock anti-imperialism. In 1957 delegates to theparty’s 25th congress finallyrepudiated—by 298 to 210 votes—theformulation embedded in The BritishRoad to Socialism that relationsbetween Britain and its colonies couldbe cast as a “fraternal association.”A vindication of Seán Murray’s

politics.

1 Mike MillotteCommunism inModernIreland: ThePursuit of theWorkers’Republic since1916Dublin. 1984

2 EmmettO’ConnorReds and theGreen: Ireland,Russia and theCommunistInternational1919-43Dublin. 2004

‘Capital in theTwenty-FirstCenturyvirtuallyignores thecapitalistexploitation oflabour, centralto Marxistpoliticaleconomy’

Socialist Voice page 9

Socialist Voice page 10

Their progress was halted when theCosta Rican authorities broke up apeople-trafficking mafia that was partof a highly organised cartel oforganised bands that had beenfacilitating the thousands of migrants.The reasons for both the “mass

migration” (as the imperialist press callit, as part of the permanent spin onany story related to Cuba) and theparticular route that became the firstchoice of most young “AmericanDream” aspirants from Cuba are—asindeed most things involving Cuba-USpolitics are—dynamic and complex butcan be partially explained by thefollowing factors.There are serious and profound

economic problems in Cuba, most—but by no means all—directlyattributable to the still fully functionaland enforced illegal blockade of thecountry by every US government sincethat of John F. Kennedy.I don’t want to wander too far off the

migration theme here, but it isimportant to note that the blockade isfar more destructive, debilitating andspiteful than a mere prohibition onAmerican companies trading withCuba, and vice versa.For example, if a person in

Ballydehob wants to sell lobster pots

that they have produced using screwsbought from Belarus that containCuban nickel to a buyer in the OuterHebrides, their business, and all theother businesses involved, will beprohibited from trading with anyAmerican entity—or a subsidiary ofany American entity not based in theUnited States—even in what wouldnow be fifth, sixth etc. countries—andhit with an enforceable fine that canbe in the multi-million-dollar range. Aneven more nasty instrument ofaggression than it may at firstappear. . .Back on message . . .The desire for economic betterment,

combined with other internal social andeconomic realities, the same healthyinterest in travel and exploration thatyoung people everywhere experience,as well as the presence abroad offamily members, somewhat explainswhat motivates the interest inmigration.There is one other crucial and

exceptional factor, a thorn in the sideof Cuba-US relations since it wasimplemented and that has given anincentive to this type of dangerous,destructive, chaotic and uncontrolledexodus: the “Cuban Adjustment Act.”In a nutshell, this law, dating from

the earliest years of the triumphantCuban Revolution, guarantees anyCuban—regardless of past indiscretionsof any type, and without anybackground investigation whatsoever—temporary residence and “refugee”status, with a very generous series offinancial and social supports thatinclude work permits, the right to

decent (furnished) housing, a weeklycash stipend, food stamps and medicalinsurance for 366 days, at which pointa permanent-resident card (green card)and a fast track to citizenship areguaranteed.It was always intended to undermine

the will of the Cuban people, by fairmeans or foul. The criminal kidnappingand forced exile by the Catholic Churchof more than fifteen thousand Cubanchildren in 1960–62 shares the sameDNA as that of this law.The results of an offer such as this

anywhere on earth today are notdifficult to conceptualise. In the LatinAmerican (including Cuban) contextthere are added historical and culturaldimensions that pre-date theRevolution.For decades US governments have

only entered into talks about, or signedaccords on, orderly and legal migrationbetween the United States and Cubaunder serious domestic pressure fromevents such as the Mariel crisis in1980.For political gain, they have never

subsequently kept to theircommitments in this regard, causingsevere pain, hardship, financialpressure and often the loss of a lovedone to Cuban families separated by theFlorida Straits and cruel USprohibitions.In much the same way as most of

their global foreign policy and practicecould never be remotely tolerated intimes of peace, decent, respectfulrelations with Cuba could directly leadto the redundancy of hundreds livingoff a “blockade and regime-changeindustry” into which they pump—eventoday, despite all the media hype aboutprogress—tens of millions of dollarsannually.The “wet foot, dry foot” policy that

arises from the manner in which theCuban Adjustment Act is implemented(meaning that Cubans caught by theUS Coastguard at sea are returned toCuba but if they get one foot on dryland can collect their coveted prize) isthe reason why the overland routebecame so popular of late.The propaganda value of images of

Cubans “fleeing the regime” when infact it was the same as taking a home-made boat to Holyhead, for the samereason that the sons and daughters ofErin have done throughout our history,was immense and well exploited by aUS establishment still angry havingbeen whipped into submission by Fidelat the Bay of Pigs.Since 2014 the process of leaving

Cuba legally has been greatly simplified

Seán Joseph Clancy

IN RECENT days more than seven thousandCuban migrants stranded at the Nicaraguanborder in Costa Rica and a further two

thousand at the Costa Rican border in Panamahave started to continue their overland and airjourney to the United States.

Letter from (near) Havana

solidarity

Páirtí Cumannach na hÉireann

Socialist Voice page 11

by reforms introduced by thegovernment. Until the recent crisisresulted in a change, Cubans had notneeded a visa to enter Ecuador. Therewas no “wet-foot” risk associated withtheir onward route through Colombiaand Central America to the US borderin Mexico, where a simple “I am fleeingpolitical persecution” guaranteed “céadmíle fáilte” from Uncle Sam himself.Because there was no illegality or

visa irregularity associated with leavingCuba, once their paperwork has beenprocessed many of the “refugees”return to Cuba when their governmentfood stamps are bought by racketeersand their payments go directly intobank accounts, for withdrawal whenthey return—just before their limit ofone year and one day has expired—tocollect their green cards.As they do, their paths cross those

of hundreds of thousands ofunfortunates from South and CentralAmerica who are genuinely persecutedand genuinely in dire need of refuge,for whom Uncle Sam shows nocompassion in return for no politicalgain and only displaying a “No room”sign over the door of the Star-SpangledBanner Inn.The unwillingness of Obama to at

least repeal the conditions (if not thebody) of this law again speaks volumesabout how deep his desire to normaliseties with Cuba really runs.Somewhat ironically, it is now those

to his right, who see the manipulationof what was once a beloved instrumentwith which to beat the “CastroBrothers” (more right-wing mediadouble-speak to imply a non-existentpolitical dynasty) as having becomebeneficial to the Cuban revolutionarysocialist socio-economic matrix, whoare now most vocal in calling for theurgent reform, or repeal, of this law.Even they can see that describing

those who enter and leave Cuba at willfor holidays, business or family visits as“persecuted” is a bit of a stretch.They find themselves on the same

side as their revolutionary counterpartswho, after the lifting of the blockadeand the return of the lands in theGuantánamo province in eastern Cuba,occupied by an illegal air base andconcentration camp, consider theabolition of the Cuban Adjustment Actessential to progress on the road tonormalisation.In the meantime—and in

anticipation of change sooner ratherthan later—many more Cubans will findnew ways to arrive with dry feet in theUnited States, half-heartedly pleadingpersecution, simply to avail of the offerwhile it lasts.

Dublin’s oldest radical bookshopis named after James Connolly, Ireland’s socialist pioneer and martyrThe place for�H Irish history�H politics�H philosophy�H feminismH Marxist classics�H trade union affairs�H environmental issues H progressive literature H radical periodicals43 East Essex Street, Dublin, between Temple Bar and Parliament Street (01) 6708707 connollybooks@eircon.net

Connolly Books

Join the fight for socialism Send me information on Communist Party membershipName

Address

Post Code Phone

e mail

send to CPI 43 East Essex Street, Dublin D02 XH96 CPI PO Box 85 Belfast BT1 1SR

SocialistVoicesubscription,send €15 (£10)to Socialist Voice,43 East EssexStreet, DublinD02 XH96, forone year (10–12issues). Thisrate includespostage withinIreland; rates forother countrieson request.Send an emailfor the freesubscription tothe email edition.

Unitysubscription send£20 for 6 monthsor £40 for 12months to Unity,PO Box 85,Belfast BT1 1SR.

George GilmoreThe Relevance of James Connollyin Ireland Today [1970] €3 (£2.30)

Thomas MetscherThe Radicalism of Swift €3.50 (£2.70)

New books from the Communist Party

Socialist Voice page 12

culture

INTERNATIONAL POETRY COMPETITION, 2016Reclaim the Vision of 1916—a Citizens’ InitiativeTheme: “The Vision of 1916: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow”

Táimid thar a bheith bródúil ascur in iúl daoibh go bhfuil árgcomórtas filíochta idirnáisiúnta,2016, ar oscailt anois agus agglacadh le hiarratais. Faigheannan comórtas seo inspioráid óneolas go bhfuil nasc láidir idir anfhilíocht agus Éirí Amach 1916—a nglaoitear “Réabhlóid na bhFilí”air go minic. Ba fhilí oilte iadroinnt mhaith de cheannairí anÉirí Amach, ina measc PatrickPearse, Joseph Mary Plunkett,James Connolly, agus Thomasoirirc MacDonagh, a raibh clúagus cáil air freisin toisc an-iarrachtaí mar mhúinteoir,dhrámadóir, scoláire Gaeilge,agus theoiricí litríochta. Is in onóir

Mhic Donncha a roghnaíomarBonn Thomáis Mhic Dhonncha, adhear Robert Ballagh, mar chéadduais, chomh maith le duaisairgid €1,000.Spreag an tÉirí Amach é féin

glúin filí agus scríbhneoirí a bhfuilclú agus cáil náisiúnta agusidirnáisiúnta orthu—ina meascGeorge Russell, Francis Ledwidge,Pádraic Colum, James Stephens,Seán O’Casey, Eva Gore-Booth,agus William Butler Yeats—chunathmhachnamh a dhéanamh aridéil, imeachtaí, fhir agus mnáagus iarmhairtí an Éirí Amach. Isféidir a rá freisin go suíonn filíGaeilge ar nós Liam S. Gógan,Máirtín Ó Direáin, Seán Ó

Ríordáin, Máire Mhac an tSaoi,Eoghan Ó Tuairisc agus Seán ÓTuama taobh le taobh leo.Mar sin, táimid ag tabhairt

cuireadh do scríbhneoirí filíochtaan ghlúin seo, idir óg agus níosaosta, fuaimintiúil agus ag teachtchun cinn, athmhachnamh adhéanamh ar théama anchomórtais agus suas le trí dhána chur faoi bhráid ár mbreithiúna.Tá cead cur isteach ar an

gcomórtas ag gach duine atá sébliana déag d’aois nó níos sine abhfuil cónaí air in Éirinn nó tharlear.Ceadaítear iarratais a bheith i

mBéarla, i nGaeilge, nó i dteangaar bith eile atá in úsáid choiteann

in Éirinn inniu (mar aon le haistriúgo Béarla nó Gaeilge).Is iad na breithimh Catherine

Ann Cullen, Louis de Paor, agusCiaran Carty. Beidh an tOllamhMichael Cronin mar chomhairleoirteangacha don chomórtas.Na duaiseanna: An chéad duais,Bonn Mhic Dhonncha agus€1,000; an dara duais: €500;an tríú duais: €250.Táillí iarratais: €10 don chéaddán, €5 don dara dán, €5 dontríú dán.Le cur isteach ar an iarratas:féachwww.reclaim1916.ie/international-poetry-competition.Dáta deiridh: 29 Feabhra 2016.

Inspired by the strongconnections between poetry andthe Easter Rising—often knownas the “Poets’ Revolution”—weare proud to announce that ourInternational Poetry Competition,2016, is now open forsubmissions.Many of the Rising’s leaders

were accomplished poets,including Patrick Pearse, JosephMary Plunkett, James Connolly,and the eminent ThomasMacDonagh,also acclaimed forhis talents as a teacher,playwright, Irish scholar, andliterary theorist. It is inMacDonagh’s honour that we

have chosen for thecompetition’s first prize theThomas MacDonagh Medal,designed by Robert Ballagh,together with a cash award of€1,000.In its aftermath the Rising

motivated a generation of poetsand writers of national andinternational renown—includingGeorge Russell, FrancisLedwidge, Pádraic Colum, JamesStephens, Seán O’Casey, EvaGore-Booth, and William ButlerYeats—to reflect upon its ideals,events, men and women, andconsequences. Alongside thesecan be placed a succession of

Irish-language poets thatincludes Liam S. Gógan, MáirtínÓ Direáin, Seán Ó Ríordáin,Máire Mhac an tSaoi, Eoghan ÓTuairisc, and Seán Ó Tuama.Likewise, we are now inviting

the present generation of writersof poetry, young and older,established and emerging, toreflect upon the competition’stheme and to submit up to threeentries for our judges’consideration.The competition is open to

those over the age of sixteenliving in Ireland or abroad.Entries may be in English, Irish,

or any other language in

common use in Ireland today(with either English or Irishtranslations).The judges are Catherine Ann

Cullen, Louis de Paor, and CiaránCarty. Prof. Michael Cronin willact as the competition’slanguages adviser.Prizes: First, Thomas MacDonaghMedal and €1,000; second,€500; third, €250.Entry fees: €10 for first poem,€5 for second poem, €5 forthird poem.To enter: seewww.reclaim1916.iie/international-poetry-competition/.Closing date: 29 February 2016.

ATHSHLÁNAIGH FÍS 1916: TIONSCNAMH SAORÁNACHComórtas Idirnáisiúnta Filíochta, 2016Téama: Fís 1916: Inné, Inniu, agus Amárach

James Connolly Festival, 20169–15 May 2016 A week of films,

fun, politics, and debateTwitter: http://twitter.com/ConnollyFest

E-mail: jamesconnollyfestival@gmail.com

Annual James ConnollyCommemoration

Sunday 15 May, 3pmAs it has done every year for decades, the CPI will hold its

annual James Connolly Commemoration in Arbour Hill,Dublin, on the Sunday nearest the date of his execution

(12 May). All are welcome.▶Arbour Hill Cemetery (behind Collins Barracks).