Irish politics: Brief overview on ultranationalism

 "But you see, it's not me, its not my family"

While this lyric can be interpreted in many ways with it being ambiguous as to whether the Cranberries on writing Zombie were demonstrating anger at all violence, or whether they wrote the song specifically to oppose the actions of the IRA in particular, there does appear to remain a common recurrent theme of apathy and inability to engage with or initiate conflict apparent in much of the political discourse of the present day, in the same way as many misguidedly assume that involvement in war efforts benefits the economy and further preserve their influence. This can be reflected on when observing historic interregional cultural and religious conflicts evident within Ireland, and their relations with the UK and the EU.

One can notice the clear contrasts between the attitudes of Northern Ireland and Southern Ireland with regard to the willingness of the people to engage with these conflicts, as well as their comparatively isolationist motives with regard to their engagement with each other's agenda when reflecting on these observations. This is very effectively summarised through the the claim from a 1974 Provisional pamphlet that "the people of the Six Counties are justifiably angry and bitterly disappointed that their suffering, their hardships, their struggle for survival have been viewed as less important than the price of Guinness in the rest of Ireland". This presents the clear indifference and distaste towards the maintaining of ties with historically socially conservative anti-internationalist monarchist ideals evident within the UK government, which would thus appear to be counterproductive and a significant threat to maintaining republican ideals central to the establishment of their sovereignty and left-wing internationalist presence (as well as in developing their own alternative systems of governance). This sentiment can also be clearly exemplified through the ever apparent sentiment present amongst many republicans that a lack of care for Irish citizens and their individual identity is a fundamental facet to loyalist ideology, this going as far to even questioning as to whether they wanted a free and fair society at all, as was said by Sinn-Fein vice president Maire Drumm on this subject in 1971 when she wondered "if the people of Munster want us to be part of a free Ireland at all", this being in agreement with Martin McGuinness who took it upon himself to illicit the blame on disinterested and apathetic individuals in Southern Ireland when he demanded that southerners 'take some course of action to impress on your cowardly government that unless something is done by them to remove the British Army by force of arms, the people of the 26 [counties] shall be regarded as cowards and traitors with a few honourable exceptions' in 1974. This would thus prove to be of importance in greater understanding the limited importance of loyalism in Irish society in general and how it only served to be of benefit and interest to those supporting individualist anti-internationalist social conservatives who used this agenda to fuel far right and xenophobic agenda, which continued to be apparent and ongoing even at this present time with division and hatred reaching their peaks throughout the decades following the 1970s (and that we can clearly see remaining in light to recent far right attacks and violence in Belfast last week).

What seems even more alarming is the motives for this racial hate and violence that took place especially considering a very small proportion of under 2% of the Northern Irish population are actually migrants, thus presenting this as likely more than just a response and means of acting on the sense of fear and concern demonstrated by far right pressure groups who had fallen victim to narratives placing the blame on uncontrolled immigration supposedly threatening their livelihoods. These events were thus purely unprovoked and unjustifiable racially orientated violence that acts as a mere reflection of limited social progress and active change to society, in spite of political advancements having been seen to have been taking place. It is through event such as this that one can reflect on the clear similarities in patterns of exploitation of power and military interest as had been observed when conflicts between loyalists and republicans in Northern Ireland were at their peak, and ultimately present the interests (particularly in relation to the hugely apparent anti-internationalist Euro-scepticism, militarism, and British nationalism evident in much of present day UK politics) of both of these nations to be fairly similar to each other. This can thus prove to potentially explain the distancing and lack of interest of Southern Ireland in the commonalities of Northern Irish politics, along with providing an explanation as to why the people of Northern Ireland may appear to be considerably more closely aligned with the UK as a part of their identity than the rest of Ireland potentially. These attitudes can thus appear to explain the potential causes of racism in the lead up to last week's attacks.

Comparative analysis of Left-Hegelian and Marxist takes on religious discrimination

        Signs I saw at the 2026 Nakba demo opposing Zionism, antisemitism and islamophobia

In the current political climate wrought with polarisation and division. Far removed from the past primarily economically and historically driven perceptions of certain religious groups popular amongst many 19th century political theorists, current antisemitism and islamophobia is set about with the motives to further develop ultranationalist and neo-colonialist intentions to create a state built with a white supremacist western homogenate as its cultural and ideological basis. This thus acts as merely a means of further making fascism appear somewhat more palatable when overshadowed by the potential for future developmental and socioeconomic proposals, and the core aims of supposed freedom of expression and representation of religious values. It is, however, also important that one reflects upon historic dialect on labour movements and collective attempts to emancipate the people and mobilise in class struggle, considering the emphasis on the cultural and demographic characteristics that remain so heavily embedded in left-Hegelian and Marxist analysis of society, thus extending to religious principles. It is through this that we can in this post unpick and critically analyse historic narratives on this subject, and thus effectively assess their role in influencing present day attitudes and political discourse that have impacted on conflict and division within society brought about through religious intolerances.

In much of Hegel's critique of the rapidly industrialising capitalist society of the 19th century, the support for religious ideals, as was evident throughout this period, was not looked at in a particularly positive light. In fact, they even went so far to condemn and put the blame on religion for many issues, using this to substantiate claims that it was counterrevolutionary and would stop society from effectively moving forward in the future. While this was not specific to any specific religions and unlikely to be intended in a discriminatory manner, the establishment of these ideals can appear to have been an important turning point in the changing of attitudes towards religion, especially with regard to the rise in atheism. 

This is reflected on through Marx's atheism having been set about as a dogmatic cornerstone in his theory, this proving fundamental in the understanding of social and political tensions that had been observed accelerated by violence committed by extreme atheists to eliminate potential threats of conflict amongst differing religious groups, this previously having been supposedly theorised in left Hegelian dialect. However, in spite of this, Marx favoured alternative more sustainable means of resolving religious conflicts as opposed to engaging in direct attacks against individually targeted religious groups. This was largely because he regarded religion as an implicit facet to a larger issue that could be attributed to the aims to further marginalise and exercise superiority as a power over victims supposedly to blame. One can clearly see this through his view that religious discrimination arises due to individual failures and personal struggles causing one to feel they have "not yet found himself or has already lost himself again", so arrive at the point by which they are poised to illicit the blame onto and target certain minority groups whose threat and vulnerability are not properly understood. It is through this that one can identify links to the origins of antisemitism, the rise of the Nazis, and the actions of the IDF in justifying the illegal settler colonial genocidal apartheid state of Israel, so as to thinly disguise fascistic sentiment and attempts to develop a western white colonial ethno-state (essentially fascism in its purest form) as an extreme form of religious fanaticism.

However, from an alternative lens, one can argue that Marx and Engels very much perpetuated antisemitic viewpoints, these largely having arisen from an economic standpoint, and in relation to the supposed socioeconomic and demographic characteristics associated with Jews, in the way that they have described the religion, clearly overlapping with those of the bourgeois and those who would fail and be of limited assistance in bringing about the proposed revolutionary efforts they had devised. This perspective is very well described by Nathan Reich who considers antisemitism as, with reference to Marxist economic theory, a natural response to economic collapse and a representation of the fears and angers of the proletariat. He thus describes these attitudes as being “the expression of envy felt by the poor Gentile population for "Jewish" wealth; as the reflection of competition for jobs between Jewish and non-Jewish applicants; as the expression of resentment against the "undue" Jewish concentration in certain well-paid professions and important branches of trade”.  This, however, strongly appears to contrast with the general consensus of antisemitism is the fundamental principle that fascism flourishes through, which many are more familiar with. These largely come about through fear and manipulation through group mentality leading to a desire to illicit blame on and persecute minority groups, as well as a desire to make blatant discrimination and fascistic principles on has become further apparent. With fascism essentially being regarded as a form of ultranationalist racial supremacist global imperialism by which individuals on the far right use to preserve and gain influence by, antisemitism appears to be a very clearly fundamental aspect of fascistic narrative and one of its core principles.

When reflecting on the rising islamophobia prevalent during present times at the same time as antisemitism is on the rise, it is important that these are not looked at as two separate opposing issues affecting and representing conflict between both specific religious groups, but rather two forms of evidence for the significance of each other set about with alternate fascistic motives, which serve to further divide and polarise society. This mentality comes into place with the arguments adopted by some that supposed excessive attention being paid on islamophobia merely acting as a means by which to disguise and overshadow the ever present problem of antisemitism within society, an attitude which further breeds division and discrimination within society.

Equally, internal sectarianism and division within individual religions in relation to their differences in practise and their presence in society are also significant factors that should be observed when reflecting on the role of religion in society and the establishment of an alternative form of cultural identity. This was the case with Irish loyalism versus unionism with regard to the dissolution of the Protestant Church and the separation of Northern Ireland from the UK. This has come with much concern with regard to the ability for Northern Ireland to retain its political autonomy and sovereignty in conjunction with Ireland (which would geographically and politically be to their advantage and would give them greater freedom and core international connections, as well as important in preserving their individual high value cultural dimension). This example thus very effectively exemplifies the role of religion in evaluating present and future geopolitics, and in navigating agreements with close allied nations. 

While a more moderate and liberal argument might regard the presence of religion within today's society as a minor purely cultural facet to a broader sociopolitical landscape, this facet rapidly diminishing in its presence as society continues to advance, it is clear that this is an overly simplistic perspective on the matter with a profound lack of nuance. With Marx and Engels' dialect in mind, the very causes of conflict and sociopolitical instability that abolishing religion, and thus subsequently refusing to support religious freedom, is the exact reasoning behind the rise of religious discrimination within society. The means of achieving revolutionary change is not through the abolition of sectarianism and the reversal of internal division amongst religious societies through developing a sense of homogeneity that would lead to greater tolerance within society, in the same way that this wouldn't be achieved purely through the abolition of religion itself. It is instead through diplomacy and preservation of democratic values to maintain social conscience that discrimination can be avoided, considering that, as observed in this article, this is mainly down to intrinsic corruption and exploitation of prejudiced groups by the individuals within core centralised power overall, as well as the use of these strategies instead of resorting to fear, anger and desire to blame minority groups, which is the foundation of much fascism.

Marilyn Monroe's 100th birthday: Did she have the makings of an unexpected revolutionary?

 

Yesterday would have been Marilyn Monroe's 100th birthday. It is in tribute to the great feminist icon (who shares my love for bright red lipstick!) that I will write this post observing the many ways she shaped the last century's fashion, popular culture, and film, and, most of all, the way that women's presence in society could be regarded, surpassing all kinds of stereotypical ideation demonstrated through the presence of the male gaze, and other huge chauvinist attitudes that were apparent in the film industry in the US during this period. We can thus very clearly consider her as way more than just the perennial stereotype of the heavily sexualised glossy pop icon that she has for too long been portrayed as, and even go so far as to view her as, in her own rights, a true revolutionary and a good comrade.

When reflecting on the ways in which the stereotype of subservience, submission and reliance on men has been considered as an integral aspect of her character, however, we can see this alternate perspective as unfortunately heavily overshadowed. This can be observed through, not only the very obvious ways in which she has been seen to portray primarily young, attractive, gullible, and somewhat vulnerable females who appear unable to think for themselves. This is made apparent through her first husband's description of her as a "sweet generous religious girl" who "liked to be cuddled", as well as a "photographer's dream", clearly embodying the ideals of a patriarchal society in which attitudes such as these to women in society appeared commonplace. However, this would appear to only be a very superficial look at her, and one of her many clever means of demonstrating genuine feminist principles and modelling society of the time with clear distaste. As has been described in a report on Monroe by Joseph Walford of Oxford University, it can be seen that there was a clear sentiment that "If not afforded multi-dimensionality, Marilyn’s roles were never inconsequential" in their ironic and perhaps somewhat satirical representation of a woman's eye view on how heavily ingrained materialism, mass exploitation, and dehumanisation evident amongst the supposedly more easily marginalised groups including women within American society of the 1940s and 50s, these being materialised and illustrated through the "guilty pleasures" of "sexual temptation" and "reproachable materialism", which Monroe clearly embodied within her pieces. This can thus be seen as potentially acting as an implicit representation of moralistic socialism and the need for a more just and equal society built upon the crucial principles of equality of opportunities and fair representation through means other than class, gender and social standing.

While Monroe may not fully embody radical feminist principles as they were presented by Hegel, Marx and Engels which put a class-centred dimension with major emphasis on repression and exploitation through struggle amongst a hierarchical dynamic always to be observed in any relations between men and women, she clearly appeared an instrumental figure in the mobilisation of the masses and an inspiration in encouraging women to fight against oppression. Her ongoing legacy can be reflected through her instantly recognised trademark image which appears as a flagship symbol of iconic glamour and style amongst both the old and the young, and the many reproductions and representations of her pieces. It is through this that one can understand a lesser side to Monroe, and envisage her as a true comrade and sister to us, a side that needs to receive more attention.

Society after the Cold War: the peak of Western expansionist capitalism or a period of communist success?

                                       Cold War Propaganda (gabriel-chetcuti.wordpress.com)

With one of the core defining aspects of the aftermath of the Cold War being the significant failures of the US during the Second World War and the Cold War having developed as sense of comparative instability and sociopolitical insecurity, it is clear that they desired change through economic prosperity. This was the core driving force behind their advocacy for globalism through neocolonial and expansionist agenda, so as to achieve this, all the while maintaining mutual symbiotic relations with their core allies, establishing links to resource rich and economically valuable regions that would be crucial in their development, and ultimately avoiding any potential threats with their communist opposition. However, it is only through analysing the tensions remaining between the Eastern and Western Worlds that one can realise this as heavily Western centric perception of these events, and the potential argument that this engagement in globalist agenda was merely a means of substantiating claims of overriding emphasis on the preservation of the US' superpower status to support their own individual ideals.

The US' strong support for capitalism and their own individualist agenda taking centre stage in political and economic decision making after the Cold War is clearly observed when reflecting on the implementation of the Marshall Plan, This was done after the Second World War, and there was seen to be a noticeable rise in support by the US for the principles set about through this agreement during and after the Cold War. This agreement was devised by President Truman on April 3rd 1948 with the key motive that the US provides economic support to assist the redevelopment and rebuilding of economic infrastructure in Europe, leading to the appropriation of $13.3 billion to be directed towards assisting this recovery, through the provision of the required resources and capital to facilitate this to affected European nations. This was also a core turning point in the revival of historic Western colonial globalist agenda in that it in turn reflected the neo-colonial undertones of much of the US' supposed progression in their internationalist agenda.

Equally, similar reasoning and intentions to maintain law and order in a functioning global political system that puts emphasis on peace, stability and security through the preservation of colonialist superpower influence is observed with the establishment of the Bretton Woods agreement and the strong advocacy for this amongst not just the US, but also by many of the recovering European nations. It is important to note the considerable delays in the initiation of this agreement, this having been largely due to there having been significant unexpected economic costs having arisen for these nations when working around the still felt impacts of the Cold War in its aftermath, which led to the expansion and establishment of new forms of polycrises. Equally, the strong economic dominance of the US overall in the management of global financial systems could be argued to have somewhat led to conditions of underdevelopment being further exacerbated and attempts for affected nations struggling to recover and rebuild their infrastructure appearing to have been sabotaged. This is reflected through the US dollar having remained as the dominant global currency and the basis of all international exchange and use of financial action. Greater pressure for these nations to pay reparations to the US in relation to their involvement in the Cold War had also drained a lot of their reserves of income, thus reducing the amount they could invest into this recovery, and that attempts to close the dollar gap having failed had meant that socioeconomic disparities within these regions had been exacerbated. It is through this that one can reflect on the overriding US capitalist influence and its ever present dominance within global political systems, as continues to be the case for much of today's spheres of influence dominated by Western interests.

However, it is also through reflecting on and drawing comparisons with the growth and cultural change observed for Europe during the period of the Soviet union, North Korea and Vietnam, with regard to, not just their presence within the Cold War, but the expansion and redefinition of their spheres of influence and international presence. This appears clear considering the aforementioned failures of the US during the Cold War. The Soviet Union sought to avoid potential invasion by the US and thus preserve independence and individual international presence with the European nations within maintaining their autonomy and sovereignty so as to separate from the US' influence and avoid future neocolonial exploitation. Similar methods of governance and ideals to build society on were adopted by Vietnam, as a means of countering past imperial activity within the region, and liberate all in a struggle against freedom from this form of oppression by the US and Europe. However, it can also be argued that this is not necessarily a truly communist principle as many may have historically referred to it as, but merely a desire for greater stability and security. It could thus be seen that the description of the Vietnamese National Liberation Front (NLF), which facilitated this change, as communist in nature, and that the term communist was perhaps likely a derogatory means of referring to any opposition by the US during this period, if they went against or were a threat to the US' individual aims.

It is through an understanding of the sociopolitical and economic dimension of the ongoing colonial and neocolonial Western superpower influence after the COld war that continued to have a high profile and remain clearly prevalent on much of the international globalist and expansionist agenda of the time, that one can notice the overriding dominance of capitalism in modern society, and its ongoing legacy. It is therefore important that an effective distinction between the core principles of communism and any anti-colonial sentiment (with these not always functioning in a mutual and effective manner alongside each other in society). It can then be clearly concluded that, in spite of the failings of the US in the Cold War, there was arguably no particularly noticeable turning point in the redefinition of communist ideology and its presence in global systems having been observed during this time, and that this merely acted as an opportunity for settler colonial exploitation to only be exacerbated, thus foreshadowing potential future conflict and unlawful abuse and exploitation of international influence.

Overview of Marxism and food: How to eat the rich and why they are tasteless

TRIGGER WARNING: Some mention of disordered eating and mental health appears briefly in this article. If you are likely to be affected by this trigger, feel free to skip the section as appropriate or read no more.

Whether it is in the form of cheap fuel to sustain oneself through a long workday, a nice meal to bond over socially as a family in the evening, or a means of showing off one's decadence and love of luxury through the buying of the finest and most exotic ingredients, food is something we all have the common need of and should act as a given basic right, and so the need for it, the ultimate universal leveller of all classes and groups in society. Its huge variety and the many different forms it takes and cultures it exists in act can help it act as the ultimate visual representation of the unity and diversity of people within society.

Or at least, that's what it should be like and it should be enjoyable for all. Sadly, it has turned into a source of conflict and inequality, an obsession, or a thing that has been turned into a mechanical afterthought and a rigid distraction from one's individual aims in a capitalist society merely to keep the cogs turning and the workplace functioning efficiently, even if potential disregard for one's personal wellbeing and needs is supposedly secondary in importance. As I sit and eat my dinner while typing away at this screen (yet another way of further proving this sentiment), I will further dig into and savour the capitalist undertones of food production. Tuck in dear readers....

According to Max Weber, society is a complex product shaped by humans' social actions (Fuchs, 2020), a sentiment further expanding upon Marx's materialist world view that people would use society and its relative assets to support their own needs and interests, and those of society collectively. This is reflected through the major overriding influence of class in the bourgeois capitalist society of his time, and their ability to exploit and use the resources and material production of the working classes to their advantage. This is not to say, however, that the idealist principles for a true utopian socialist society cannot be considered as having a role in the development of this society, and that social reformation would damage its structural integrity, but that the mutual relations between the different classes within society are merely relations of domination, and thrive off of the collective power of the masses. Structures, in the form they are described here, are built off of repeated organisational behaviours and distinct hierarchy to create an illusion of social and political stability. Indeed, this can appear to in part explain the conflict between the peasant and proletarian agricultural workers and those developing efficient technological means of mechanising agricultural production, with the latter focusing primarily on efficiency and ability to produce a large amount of food to sustain a rapidly growing population, notably with a rising middle class able to consume considerably larger amounts of available food and land. The existence of the mechanised systems of agriculture in question, as well as acting as important industrial ventures to bring in greater wealth to the bourgeois, appear further alienate the proletariat. This is especially true considering their operation relies heavily on maintaining constant capitalist relations within society (Peng, 2020), and assumes that this rising consumption will remain linear so they can continue to provide for it (thus claiming to effectively counter Malthusian economic principles in which society will be unable to function due to there being no suitable means of providing for the surplus population sustainably). This would thus present the implementation of these agroecological advancements in modernised agricultural systems to appear somewhat counterintuitive to the advancement of an evolutionary society ruled in socialist principles, especially seeing as the interests of the peasants which arguably form the foundations of this society are dismissed, and attention is instead diverted to supporting the capitalist interests of the wealthy. Moreover, increased potential for eco-fascism and greenwashing could arise due to the overshadowing of this exploitative ultra-capitalist agenda with comparatively palatable environmentalist principles which these systems also clearly advocate for.

When reflecting on this issue, the clear paradoxical nature of this logic regarding the revolutionising of agricultural production in relation to the principles of agroecology is clearly evident in that, the principles of agroecology are built on the logic that there are always the sufficient land and resources for producing food, but that the rising  consumer demands under capitalism and the mechanisation and use of comparatively less sustainable methods of agriculture (i.e. through deforestation, use of chemical fertilisers, and the creation of monocultures as opposed to polycultures). These are all principles that would clearly be advocated within the socialist schools of thought. This rising consumption can also be very much attributed to globalisation and Westernisation having led to the increased consumption of meat and processed foods, both of which putting a greater strain of land and water available for this, thus leading to comparatively more unethical methods of production being adopted than prior to capitalism. With meat production, for instance, this would not have become the exploitative practise it is today, also featuring unnecessary additions to the final product to assist this if less of it needed to be produced quickly and effectively to provide for rising global demands. Indeed, it was the most natural thing to function on a diet consisting primarily of meat (and many still would do in certain environments by which limited other food is abundant, such as with the Inuits or small scale hunter gatherer societies), usually hunted, and it was purely due to evolution through natural selection allowing for the digestion of dairy and plant matter that humans evolved to adapt to a diet more similar to today's diet. It is for this reason that one should not consider meat consumption and the likes as inherently evil, unnatural and unsustainable, and should instead be diverting their attention to dismantling capitalist systems and revolutionising society, as well as reducing their consumption of these products in general, as opposed to greenwashing and pushing capitalist agenda through an alternative completely plant based diet assisted by the ironically capitalist means of marketing and facilitating this (i.e. through consumerist means of marketing alternative products, these often being comparatively more expensive to use).

Moreover, this extends to the argument that when linking back of the heavy marketing of lifestyle and health, much of this also extending to diet, it can be seen that maintaining good health is a process that involves spending vast amounts of income and supporting capitalist principles. The rise of disordered eating as a byproduct of insecurity around food, lack of control, and pressure to appear in a certain way due to a combination and accumulation of multiple physical and mental health issues further acts as a reminder of this, and something that capitalism fails to help people recover from (especially considering that many underlying factors leading up to these issues do largely stem from capitalism). I for one, as a former eating disorder sufferer, who still struggles somewhat with forming a healthy relationship with food, know this is something rarely easy to treat and something that you can feel you never lose entirely, largely because of these issues and how heavily ingrained they are within current society. 

This attitude fails to make any attempt to recognise the major issues faced by many low income people in poor physical health (namely poverty, poor standard of living, lack of available green spaces and places to exercise, and the knock on consequences of poor physical and mental health) as issues brought about by capitalism, and that this is what is mainly at fault, as opposed to laziness and inability to take responsibility for one's own health through eating healthily (the strategy which many capitalists monetise and thrive off of in expanding potential economic ventures). It is without doubt that the working classes are often put at the most unfair disadvantage in this regard, with what has been coined as the "Glasgow Effect" being an excellent example of this. This principle is based off of observations that comparatively deprived urban areas with a predominantly white British working class population generally have the poorest health and standard of living (Swift, 2023). This is largely caused by the failure of capitalism in achieving economic growth through the outsourcing of previous core industries for areas in the UK such as Glasgow. This has meant that a considerable loss of income and rise in unemployment, therefore leading to inability to invest adequate funds into improving the standard of living for the people, and exacerbating socioeconomic disparities evident between the wealthiest and poorest members of society. In the case of Glasgow, there has been reported to have been a rise in unemployment by 4.7% since 2022 (above the Scottish average of 3.1%), and a rate of economic inactivity (as in neither employed nor seeking work) reaching 25.5% (ONS, 2023). Because of this, it can be clear why many residents of these deprived areas of the UK face significant inequalities regarding their health and quality of life, with life expectancy for those in deprived parts of Glasgow being 54 versus 82 for less deprived parts of Glasgow for these reasons, according to a 2008 report by the World Health Organisation (WHO). While many of these affected families struggle with poor access to high quality and nutritious food, merely putting them to blame and incentivising them to make improved choices is not a solution to the issue, and only serves to act as a rigid distraction from the flaws of an unequal society and the underlying issues posed by the prevalence of capitalism.

It is through an effective analysis of the structural flaws of the current unequal UK society that one can observe the clear need for true socialist change through true revolutionary influence. Food should be seen the way it is, as a basic right and a universal leveller enjoyed and required by all to act as a compulsory means of pleasure and fulfillment which helps bring others forward in enabling positive societal change, as opposed to something exacerbating division and that instils an unjustified sense of fear amongst the people purely down to the way capitalism has had it become viewed.

The importance of strike action, unionisation and workplace mobilisation: the legacy of the 1926 general strike

Happy Workers Day, comrades!

Today on Workers Day upon marching through London on the annual May Day march, exactly a century after the monumental nine day general strike that took place in 1926 in response to unjust working conditions and poor pay, the striking inequalities many workers have to face, along with the rise further major concerns of violence and the physical and emotional stress and vulnerability of workers (which would in turn influence their performance and ability to gain the most success and satisfaction from their work) still remains a pressing issue for today's society, even after its supposed social and economic advancement over the course of this period. In a world governed by image and pressure to function effectively in a material and consumerist led society in which capitalism takes centre stage, the current mental health crisis can prove to act as another means of developing new means of monetising wellbeing and self-fulfilment through creating marketing opportunities for medication, psychotherapy, health and fitness, and lifestyle, making it seem as though maintaining a good physical and mental state to optimise productivity within the workplace is down to the individual themself and their ability to take responsibility for their own health through this. What this mentality neglects to consider is that this is merely the fault of capitalism and the exploitative systems that this creates. It is through this that one can realise the only way of reducing this issue and bringing about change is through the same tried and tested method that has been in practice for as long as capitalism and the need for so-called efficiency within the workplace have. Marx's theory on alienation can appear to remain ever important with this regard. That method is class struggle.

The 1926 strike proves to perfectly substantiate this sentiment. This was when the Trade Union Congress (TUC) called for strikes to take place at the time of conflicts arising amongst mining  regarding the nationalisation that had taken place for these companies, something that caused mass outcry amongst private owners of mines, which advocated the use of methods popular under lucrative capitalist systems. These included a 13% wage cut and 8 hour workdays. Such was the anger at this change that 1.5 million other workers went on strike in solidarity with the miners. This lasted for 9 days with negotiations being made with the government for proposed improvements to society. These, however, were unsuccessful. In spite of this, this movement stands as an important turning point for revolutionary ideas within the workplace, and for encouraging strike action and unionisation as methods of mobilisation within the workforce as ever popular strategies for the present day.

Undertow by Suzanne Vega: Reflections on my favourite revolutionary anthem

It's widely accepted that the greatest music is born out of struggle and deep feeling for something. And so can be instrumental in effectively conveying hope, fear, and desires for revolutionary change in a simple yet eloquent manner, and act as instrumental anthems for the people collectively striving for this. Undertow by Suzanne Vega is no exception and exemplifies this sentiment perfectly, according to my interpretation of the lyrics.

While the meaning of this song is ambiguous and probably not written by Vega for this reason, I’d always considered it as a commentary on the means by which to gain liberation and peace from oppression, along with the confused and conflicted nature of ongoing war and conflict being supposedly set about to do this. The misguided aims of those hoping to achieve stability through advocating extremism fall short leaving only the fear, hopelessness and sadness of the oppressed and the oppressor to unite them (“at first I thought only tears could make us free”). The means by which this supposed liberation is observed through ironically war and oppression is through pain hence “From the point of a needle, from a diamond, from a bullet in flight”. Physical suffering and hardship being apparent in both a literal form with starvation, homelessness and loss of livelihood is clear to observe appearing to be debilitating and crushing hopes and aims, costing lives and potential change as can be reflected on with the line "and instead I found this hunger made me weak" as opposed to being supposedly "sleek" and attractive individuals or machines for assisting both the war effort and the fight for liberation as is observed in one verse.

Leading to emancipation through mass uprising and collective strength amidst this struggle being seen to act as a greater force against the oppression (“I am friend to the undertow, I take you in. I don’t let go”). Holding onto and refusing to release and set free all pain and suffering as that is what strengthens them and brings them to fight harder. As well as the opening line of “I believe right now if I could I would swallow you whole” exemplifies this. The “I would leave only bones and teeth, we could see what was underneath, and you would be free then” is about the souls and the true sense of life and worth of the oppressed remains yet gets sucked away. This then extends to the depth of this emotion literally hitting close to the bone (“salt wearing down to the bone. Like sand against the stone against the shoreline”). This could also be linked onto the perceived hunger and the intense stress to one's form that this poses as observed in another verse

The “against the stone against the shoreline” part also somehow makes me think of the line “from the river to the sea”. This feeling seems to thus break down walls and barriers allowing for narrow rivers to flow effectively to freedom and safety to reach the shoreline to the sea- a free flowing vast expanse and moving water carrying one away from the threats they leave behind and bringing all land together.

I think of this as hugely poignant and powerful song with really profound meaning that can be applied to so many times of conflict and the unendurable nature of crisis. It thus acts as a reminder for us to fight more and to not keep our true strength and desire for freedom within the inside of us, regardless of its original meaning. It’s something really beautiful in its own right that has stayed with me and always been on my mind when observing the seemingly endless and unjustifiable events that act as a catalyst for further revolutionary change,