James Connolly: the anti immigrant?

making waves

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 2, 2010
Messages
19,521
Again nothing here suggests that Connolly commissioned that leaflet or even knew about it. But, it's good to see that Connolly relates Socialism to our native Gaelic Clanns - and not to open borders.
There are none so blind than those who will not read - nothing surprising from the blinkered view of a xenophobic racist.
 


GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
That would probably be enough to have him attacked as a Zionist now, and denied a "platform", his meetings disrupted by student brats, and perhaps even to have his head bashed in by LOI hooligans?
You'd never know what these Trot dupes would do, but the fact is that James Connolly was against open borders and mass immigration, as are all genuine Socialists.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
Again, we can confirm that James Connolly was against the bourgeoisie bringing in foreign cheap labour to force down the wages of the native Irish or totally replace us - as is happening now with the support of Sinn Féin and the Trot microgroups. In effect, Connolly was a true Socialist, and true Socialists are always against mass immigration - as Marx and Engels were.
 

runwiththewind

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
12,723
Again, we can confirm that James Connolly was against the bourgeoisie bringing in foreign cheap labour to force down the wages of the native Irish or totally replace us - as is happening now with the support of Sinn Féin and the Trot microgroups. In effect, Connolly was a true Socialist, and true Socialists are always against mass immigration - as Marx and Engels were.
WTF are you talking about? Who exactly was in power when mass immigration arrived? Who is in power today and is still allowing it to continue?

How is it possible for you to be so ignorant od recent history?
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
WTF are you talking about? Who exactly was in power when mass immigration arrived? Who is in power today and is still allowing it to continue?
It wasn't James Connolly or any Socialist. It was and is the bourgeoisie looking for cheap labour and rents.
 

macedo

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
1,131
Why are we constantly amazed that new values that are less than a few decades old and still very contentious were not held by people who lived 100 years ago?
Maybe because we've just spent a very tedious few months listening to the values and actions of these people being glorified?
 

runwiththewind

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
12,723
It wasn't James Connolly or any Socialist. It was and is the bourgeoisie looking for cheap labour and rents.
Who was on power? To simplify it, which political party wad in power and which political party is in power now?
 

macedo

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2007
Messages
1,131
Because their values and actions are Glorious.
You've kind of missed the point. stopdoingstuff stuff was defending Connolly on the basis that we shouldn't apply modern mores to historical figures. Not necessarily a viewpoint I would agree with but I would agree even less with the implication of your comment which is that Connolly's anti-migrant views can be considered glorious.
 

realistic1

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2008
Messages
11,262
Oh holy bejaysus - another right-wing who reads a few quotes from a Marxist and then thinks they know what the Marxist is talking about. And not surprisingly the same right-wing doesn't even read these quotes properly.

:roll:
Well we all know the Socialist parties stance on mass immigration: No Borders and we all know how this is serving working peoples conditions.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
Well we all know the Socialist parties stance on mass immigration: No Borders and we all know how this is serving working peoples conditions.
Fake Leftie parties are for mass immigration, but genuine Socialist parties are totally against it and are for strict border controls - as we see in all Socialist states. Don't imagine that the Trots or Sinn Féin Nua are Socialist parties.
 

midlander12

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
6,368
Wasn't Connolly Scottish himself? Perhaps he was trying too hard to be 'more Irish than the Irish themselves'. As for the language quoted, it sounds standard enough for the time, when what are now seen as racist and ethnic slurs were routine and unremarkable.
 

McTell

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 16, 2012
Messages
7,711
Twitter
No
Just going through some of Connolly's writings and came across three articles. In these articles, I was astonished to see Connolly's quite anti-immigrant position on the replacement of Irish workers by English and Scottish workers. Words and phrases such as 'fresh hordes' and 'Brit-Huns' I didn't expect to see from Connolly. ...

Shocked? You shouldn't be.

That makes sense. He didn't subscribe to Marx & Engels's old-fashioned stuff: "The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working Men of All Countries, Unite!

But despite this he was a "Marxist". Or a nationalist socialist.

Failed to be elected to Dublin Corpo twice. Definitely a man of the people, using the gun when the ballot box didn't work. He has since been repackaged, relabelled and sold like a Big Mac.
 

Mr Aphorisms

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2011
Messages
5,995
Twitter
crimesofbrits
This isn't really a thread about James Connolly, is it? Its a thread about immigration dressed up in James Connolly's clothes.

For future reference, James Connolly is not Ireland's prophet or deity, we are not bound to live by his words for all time. So any hostility he expressed towards immigrants a hundred years ago has no relevance to any Irish person living today, not even Irish people who admire James Connolly as an historical figure.

Maybe next time just stick to talking about scary moooslims and their jihad.
No, it's a thread about James Connolly's views on immigration.

Where did I say Connolly was Ireland's prophet? I criticize Connolly in the OP and in posts before the one you quoted me on. I never said we should live by his every word. Where did I say or imply it?

I've no problem with 'moooslims', I've defended them repeatedly on here, way before the migrant crisis as well, which your lot actually supporting the west removing governments that were dictatorial, but stable. How did that work out?

Oh dear lord, another one who has no idea of where Connolly stood on the Second Socialist International (because OP has never heard of it and doesnt know what the fault lines were).

Connolly didnt oppose unrestricted immigration as a long -term, absolutist position - and this was meaningless in the context of movement of movement of labour by UK nationals within the UK - but on the Marxist analysis of colonisation and imperialism

Put simply, the proletariat of the oppressor nation must fight for the right of secession for the colonies that its “own” nation oppresses, and not support their own working class advantage (ie easily obtained jobs in that colony). Connolly regarded most TUs as essentially collaborating with the imperialists when they turned a blind eye to the position of other workers in their country's colonies.

This is a lot more nuanced than the OP.

He also thought that British TUs were themselves part of the bourgeois system because they represented skilled workers for the most part and did not care about those who were in more precarious jobs. This classic craft conservatism was just another form of oppression.

Connollys views were in the minority in the Second International. Whoops, boys, you'll really get upset now - he did influence Lenin, and his analysis was adopted by the Bolsheviks at the Third Socialist International.
Poor aul Eagle, when anyone disagrees with you they 'never hear', 'don't know', etc. Of course, this forum is more than a place to vent your political views or even troll, it's a way of life for you; it is your life. Instead of being a pompous tit, you could have made some sort of constructive contribution. That would be a bit hard for you though, I know.

Connolly was against cheap labour and open borders, we can see that clearly in the articles and his sentiments during the Lockout. As stated already, if you have read the debates about immigration and more on the internet in Ireland, we would be led to believe that 1916 was about open borders and unrestricted immigration and internationalism on drugs.

This is simply not true, MacDiarmada was against internationalism and banned a man from joining the IRB as a result. Connolly may have been against that view, but cheap labour and an influx of people into a country whilst people are leaving is not what he was for. We saw the complete lunacy of some of the professional protesters foaming at the mouth of foreign workers taking jobs in Ireland during the binman strikes, while later on coming out with hard-hitting political analysis of the migrant situation saying 'refugees welcome'. And of course, what are unskilled refugees from Europe, Africa, Asia gong to do when they get here? Go on unskilled jobs or join the SWP for revolution? They want open borders and complain when immigrants correctly take any job to feed their families. They come for wages and money to send back home, not standing outside Leinster house doing nothing.

We'd certainly have no eastern European fascists entering a Connolly-like Ireland, that's for sure. Or people with ideologies similar to the Nazis. I'm for immigration, but controlled immigration.
 
Last edited:


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top