to underestimate the scale rose in rebellion in Easter of reaction that exists in 1916 he seized the chance the six counties. with relish. The opening shots In England, Scotland and in the debates were fired by Wales we see the boots and Karl Radek; who saw the declubs of the British National feat of the rising as conclusive Party as a serious menace, but proof that "The Irish revoluin the North, armed neo-fascist tion... has come to an end.' gangs roam the streets and kill Catholics at random. Land issue These gangs have links with the security forces and sec- For Radek, the Irish questions of the Unionist bourgeoi- tion was essentially a land sie - the most reactionary question, which had been section of the British bourgeoi- solved by the land reforms of sie which commands the sup- 1903. This meant that the Irish port of a large section of farmers abstained from the risProtestant workers. ing, reducing the struggle to a The Northern Irish trade un- 'putsch' by an isolated group ions are solidly right wing. of petty-bourgeois idealists. Nothing is changed by the an- Trotsky took a more sympanouncements and agreements thetic view of the rising and of the last few months. This understood that the working continues to be the 'carnival of class, as well as the petty bourreaction' that James Connolly geoisie, had participated. But predicted over 70 years ago. Trotsky also felt that the basis for an Irish national revolution Timely collection has disappeared.
It was left to Lenin to dePublication of The Commu- fend the rising. He understood nists and the Irish Revolution that the question of self-deteredited by D.R. O'Connor mination was one of political Lysaght is thus timely. This ex- democracy, of a nation's right haustive collection by Russian to decide of which state it revolutionaries, spanning the wished to be a part. And that years 1899 to 1924, allows us such questions have a relative to examine how Marxists reautonomy from economic sponded to other important questions. events in Irish history. Anyone who called this moThe book draws heavily on mentous event a 'putsch' was, the work of Marx and Lenin. he said, 'either a hardened reMarx first believed Irish libera- actionary or a doctrinaire hopetion would be won only lessly incapable of picturing a through the victory of the Brit- social revolution as a living ish working class. But by 1867 thing.' In Lenin's eyes, the he said 'I used to think the separation of Ireland from Brit- mistake of the Irish was not in having risen, but in having ain impossible, I now think it risen prematurely. inevitable, although after separation there may come federa- Wrong tion'.
He argued the British work- Subsequent history has ing class should make repeal shown that both Radek and of the Union with Ireland a Trotsky were wrong in discentral part of its programme. missing the Irish national quesThis change of views was tion. Lenin stood head and based on the understanding shoulders above them all in that whilst the British working the depth of his analysis and class under Liberal influence his sympathy for the Irish was little more than a tool of movement.
the capitalists, a liberation Documents of the young Somovement had developed in viet government and the ComIreland, the Fenians, which munist International, which had assumed revolutionary forth! * port the national struggle are ;
It was the duty of British so also included. further used to expose the hypocrisy of the Labour politicians who demanded that the Soviet state unreservedly respect the right to self-determination, whilst supporting the oppression of their own colonies.
The collection ends with an exchange of letters between Nora Connolly O'Brien, daughter of James Connolly, and Leon Trotsky, where he observes, "The revolutionary tradition of the national struggle is a precious good. Would it be possible to imbue the Irish proletariat with it for its socialist class struggle, the working class of your country could, in spite of the numerical weaknesses of your population, play an important historical role and give a mighty impulse to the British working class now paralysed by the senile bureaucracy.
Tragedy
This succinctly summarises the importance of the national struggle for both the Irish and British working classes, and underlines the tragedy of the present impasse.
Anyone interested in the Irish struggle or the national question will learn a great deal from this book. Above all it illustrates how Marxists should proceed from the facts in anaİysing the national question.
Marx's call for Irish independence, resurrected by Lenin and the Communist International during his lifetime, was based on a real assessment of the state of the working class movements in Britain and Ireland. There is much to be learnt from this approach in our study of the many contemporary national struggles and conflicts. • For your copy of 'The Communists and the Irish Revolution' send 29 to Socialist Outlook, PO Box 1109, London N4 2UU. Bulk discounts are avail-. "denounce British rule and sup.." able on orders of five or more. Write for details. Kieran Mac an Ultaigh reviews Jim Sheridan's film In the Name of the Father. now on general release. ALTHOUGH 'In the Name of the Father' has received generally good reviews in Ireland and America, it has proved much more controversial in Britain, particularly in regard to its accuracy and its portrayal of the Maguire family.
Though based on Gerry Conlon's autobiography, 'Proved Innocent, it shows Conlon and his father sharing the same cell. This in fact never happened, though their cells were always very close to each other.
Licence
In defending his work Sheridan argues that it is impossible to condense 15 years into less than two and a half hours without some dramatic licence.
Significantly Conlon supports Sheridan's argument and has had no complaints about the films' portrayal of him, or the events surrounding his arrest, trial, imprisonment and eventual release.
Others have criticised it for being too pro-IRA. Again Sheridan argues that his film is not about the IRA but about miscarriage of justice.
For my part I very much appreciated In the Name of the Father.
Directad by Jim Sheridan. who also directed My Left Foot. the film stars Daniel Day Lewis as Gerry Conlon. Pete Postlewaite as his father Guiseppe and Emma Thompson as their solicitor Gareth Pierce.
While containing some very powerful scenes - ConIon's interrogation by officers of the Surrey Police Force - it also contains a great deal of humour. especially during the period ConIon and Hill (played by John Lynch) were living in a squat in London and also during many of the informal gatherings which took place while in prison.
Violent
The opening scenes of the film which depict a violent clash between the army and a section of the nationalist population of West Belfast. are as realistic as anything Oliver Stone has directed.
The film clearly shows just how easy it is for anyone, especially someone Irish, to end up on the wrong side of the law.
The only fault I found with Sheridan's film was its failure to show in any great detail the wider political campaign in defence of the Guildford Four - which highlighted their case for years before their release.
Missing Six Also no mention was made of the Birmingham Six. despite the fact that Conlon frequently bumped into members of the Six while in prison and was well aware of the campaign being mounted on their behalf.
Despite these minor criticisins the filin is well nade and worth watching.
SOCIALIST OUTLOOK No. 57, 26 February 1994, Page 14