This essay argues that so called 'left' vs 'right' ideologies are in fact anti-revolutionary in terms of working class struggle against imperialism, and only benefits the elites while serving to help maim and destroy working class cohesion.
It can be safely established that the various tenets of mass movements associated with socialism, communism and indeed fascism were all derived from discontented sections within the working class and the unemployed, who together comprise the masses. Indeed many fascists were once avid communists and socialists and vice-versa, history is very clear on that. Indeed the irony is that it is not uncommon for social movements who purport to be defenders of the working class to attack none other than other factions of the working class. This can occur when one side does not adhere to the others own unique ideology, or when individuals within working class communities deviate from expected norms of social conduct. Such deviations take shape in the form of anti-social behaviour and drug addictions which are indeed a scourge on society, however one cannot expect to amend such behaviours with extreme actions that surpass those of the subsequent victim. Indeed the science is clear in so far that only the traumatised and impoverished choose to put needles into their arms to feel better, and to think that a punishment beating (or worse) will rectify such actions is hubris to the extreme; in reality such actions can only induce a positive feedback loop of increasingly anti-social elements, trauma and poverty.
Of course the fact that working classes attack one another based upon differing views in ideology (socialist left vs. fascism right) suits the real enemy absolutely perfectly. The elites and imperialists surely revel in watching the working classes mindlessly tear each other to pieces. Indeed ideologies embedded into working class narratives typically have all the features of a religious cult. This is evident when considering the figure heads and leaders who are divine and beyond reproach coupled with divisive ideological rhetoric. Such rhetoric and ideologies are almost always designed to be simply understood while drawing distinct and clear boundaries between friend and foe; and in the process pitting neighbour, brother and sister against one another. In addition such ideologies tend to embrace ‘black and white’ or ‘us and them’ thinking in their followers which can only be divisive and anti-revolutionary.
The streets of history are strewn in the blood spilled as a result of conflicting ideologies within working class epochs. Such conflicts are often created by the elites themselves and done so to mitigate any risk of overthrow or to distract the working class from a true revolutionary unified front. Indeed the elites and imperialists are masters at controlling narratives through social capital and propaganda and as such will hold on to the reigns of power for as long as working classes continue to be fooled.
Naturally, the elites and imperialists are terrified of a unified working class revolt as was the case during the French Revolution in the late 18th Century. Indeed it can be argued that the introduction of the first industrial revolution along with the printing press was the precursor to the success of the French Revolution. This is because for the first time every ‘Tom, Dick and Harry’ had access to data and information that was previously accessible to the privileged elites only. Thus it could be argued that in today’s society the control of information along with increasing limitations on individual privacy and freedom is a fail-safe implemented to prevent such unified revolts from reoccurring. It is no secret that social media and other technologies continually and intentionally divide public opinion on the most benign and basic of issues, as well as the more malignant and volatile ones.
Indeed the industrial revolutions brought about the conditions ripe for labour and socialist movements (including communism). Such movements were an ethical and just response to imperialist oppression, yet the imperialists and elites answer to this was to induce conflicting ideologies within the working classes to create division and strife. Indeed, in the 20th Century fellow country men across Europe and Russia killed each other mercilessly and in the process boosted imperialist war machines and profit for the few; of course it was the elites who could only benefit. In 1917 Russia when the Bolsheviks overthrew the Tsarist monarchy it was not long until they themselves became the oppressors under the authoritarian command of Stalin, who completely negated on Marx's vision of liberation from the alienation of ones labour and the right to freedom of creative expression. So the question then arises, are such movements concerned with gaining freedom or power? Because only the former can be truly revolutionary.
Today in Ireland British imperialism is still using such tactics to divide our own people under the Irish Tricolour which renders the achievement of an Irish Republic in accordance to the proclamation of 1916 an impossibility. Indeed, as Thomas Clarke amongst others testified, the 1916 proclamation and activities thereof were that of a Fenian revolt and not a Socialist one. Such was the latent hostility then as it is now between two differing ideologies, yet it can be argued that the end goal of both is the same yet the process to attain it is not. Such divisive mantras only detracts from our cause for freedom for all Irish citizens.
Throughout history various revolutionaries realised such trends perfectly, none more so than the so called third positionists who transcended the duality of ‘left vs. right’ to bullishly incorporate tenets of socialism and fascism into a single revolutionary movement. Indeed coherent and rational thinkers understand that duality is a trap and there are many shades of grey as opposed to thinking purely in ‘black and white’ or in 'us and them’ terms. Such thinking only distracts us from the task of overthrowing imperialists and elites, and indeed makes it an impossibility.
Finally, by engaging into the ‘left vs. right’ playbook movements give imperialists and the elites the time and space to oppress working classes further while reaping inordinate financial rewards and social capital. Yet the most insidious consequence is that more educated segments of the working class tend to identify with their oppressor and begin to form an increasing strata of members of the middle class who offer nothing legitimate to revolutionary struggle. Yet the middle class are victims of circumstance as they will never identity or belong with both working class or the elites and imperialists; rather they are inert consumers who prop up the oppressor and negate the oppressed. The solution therefore relies on a radical dismantling of past prejudices amongst both working and middle classes.
Gowain Reid Patrick McKenna
M.Phil. M.Sc. B.Eng (Hons)
- edited 19.04.2022