The Human Cost of Education Cuts

I've spoken before about 'austerity measures' to reduce national debt. As my loyal reader will know, my special interest is the field of social care, but I've spoken enough about that for now.

Education has come to my attention, both in Ireland and England. In picking up on austerity measures in both countries, I've realised how much I've missed out on the education debate, and the human cost to education cuts.

The situation in Ireland is different to that of England, in that the cuts to services are being driven by the European Central Bank, the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, even though there are many who believe that the savage cuts across the board are unnecessary. For many years the Irish Government has been a coalition, and currently this is Fine Gael, as the largest party, and Labour, who came second in the last election. It's sad to say that Labour has had little impact on Fine Gael's plans for cuts, particularly in the area of education.

For many months, there have been protests about the Irish Government's plans to cuts Special Needs Assistant's (SNA's) posts from over 200 schools. The role of SNA's in Ireland has been important, as the very individualised support to children with special needs has enabled them to remain in mainstream education, and this has enabled them to have a 'normal' education. From the Government we hear about the necessity for cuts to reduce the national debt, but from parents, we hear about the human cost of these cuts on their children. There is no finer example of this than a mother's powerful piece on 'The Anti Room' web site, which you can read here. Do read some of the comments as well if you have the time.

The Socialist Workers Party in Ireland has said, "When children with special needs are denied early educational and therapeutic intervention, not only do the children themselves suffer major setbacks in terms of reaching their potential, but their entire families also suffer directly in terms of stress and exhaustion. And in simple economic terms, wider society suffers too, as it costs the taxpayer much, much more to intervene later on in the life of a person with special needs than it does to provide appropriate early intervention". This view is supported by Richard Boyd Barrett, TD (member of the Irish parliament), who said, "It is utterly obscene, that children, and particularly our most vulnerable children should be asked to pay the price for the gambling and greed of banks and speculators. The removal of these vital supports is not only grossly unfair - it is utterly short-sighted and economically stupid". He went on to say, "High quality early education is the single most important building block if we are to lay the basis for economic recovery and avoid social breakdown. To persist with these cuts is a recipe for disaster".

These comments could easily have been said about the situation in Britain, in relation to cuts in our educational system. Short-termism again dominates the agenda, as saving today, just stores up other problems for tomorrow.

According to researchers at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) last month, they estimate that total public spending on education in the UK will fall by over 13% in real terms between 2010/11 and 2014/15, and that "this represents the largest cut in education spending over any four-year period since at least the 1950's". The Government of course disagree, saying that "the schools budget is actually increasing by £3.6 billion in cash over the next four years". They are being disingenuous here, as there is a difference between funding for local authority schools, and the greater educational budget. Education cuts seem to be hitting the following the hardest.

1. Capital spending on school buildings
2. Higher education
3. Education for 16 - 19 year olds
4. Early years learning

Voice, the union for educational professionals, commenting on the IFS report said, "It could be argued that the areas facing the deepest cuts should be seeing increased funding. It is crucial that there is investment in education now and for the future".

On the subject of school buildings, Ian Toone from Voice said, "Many school buildings require urgent repair. Government estimates are that 75% of all UK schools have buildings that comprise asbestos-containing materials. The Joint Union Asbestos Committee (JUAC) has called for a national audit of asbestos in school buildings after figures from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) showed that of the small number of academies inspected, approximately 60% had enforcement action taken against them for failing to adequately manage the asbestos in their buildings". The Chair of the JUAC said that "we simply do not know the true extent of the problem; this could just be the tip of the iceberg". As possibly serious as asbestos is, it is but one part of the condition of school buildings. Lack of action now is simply storing up problems for the future.

Higher education, in which Britain is a world leader, is crucial for the future of research and economic development. According to estimates produced by the Institute for Fiscal Studies, funding to universities has been cut by 40%, but that some of that shortfall will be recouped with increased tuition fees. However, though the deadline for application to most courses is next January, it should be some cause for concern that according to Ucas applications at the moment are 9% down on the same period last year. This means that about 7,000 fewer students have applied so far. If you take out overseas applications, there is a drop so far of 12% for UK students. All of this may well pick up before the end of January of course, but the rise in tuition fees and subsequent student debt, is causing many people to think more carefully before applying to university. More mature students seem to be definitely re-considering their future, as people over the age of 25 have fallen by more than 25%, and among those in their forties, the drop is 28%. The Chair of the Million+ group of new universities has warned of the importance of mature students not being put off university. "Studying for the degree people need to get the job they want in the future will be particularly important for those seeking to re-enter the labour market after losing their jobs". This policy of cuts is again possibly storing up future problems, as the people the country will need, are not there.

The General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers (NUT) has said, "Despite the Government's claim to have protected school funding, most schools will see real terms cuts. Sixth form colleges and school sixth forms will be hit by the particularly savage cuts of up to 20% to 16 - 19 year olds education". Further education (16-19) plays a key role in providing training for businesses and jobs and in preparation for higher education. I've come across too many people who became educationally alive, only at the age of 16, and it would be tragic to think that similar future generations would lose out on this opportunity.

Someone said about working with the under five's, "The early years are crucial for children's social and behavioural development and in laying the foundation for lifelong learning. The early years set the course for the rest of a child's life". Cuts in this area makes it more difficult for the next one, and the next one after that, and so on. But the Government are adamant that the spending cuts will not have an adverse affect on education.

As the NUT says, "Education cuts don't heal - they cause massive social and economic costs". The social costs can be equated to the human costs of education cuts. We're not just talking about institutions or establishments losing out, but children, young people and adults, as well as those who teach them. Cuts to education will not bring long term economic recovery, but investment in education to give us the skills we need for economic recovery will.

Rising From Humble Beginnings

Michael D Higgins and his Wife Sabina

On the 29th October 2011, Michael Daniel Higgins was elected as the 9th President of Ireland. In a remarkable election, he gained nearly 40% of first preference votes, and at the final count, won with 61.6% of the vote, seeing off six other challenges, and was nearly 380,000 votes ahead of his nearest challenger.

You can read a warm and appreciative blog here from my Son, Chris. Michael D (as he is always referred to) is a remarkable man, and his rise to the high office of President, caused me to reflect on how possible was it in Britain today for someone with a similar background to rise to the top. I propose to look at Michael D; examine some figures from Britain's past, and consider the position in Britain today.

Michael D was born in Limerick, but raised in County Clare by a family who paid a huge price during the tumultuous events surrounding the foundation of the Irish state. His was a humble, and relatively poor background, but as the link above mentions, he saw education as his means of escape, and has written powerfully about its ability to lift people from one life into another. He said, "What happens in education is crucial to the life of the person, and it defines the values of the society". I was particularly struck by what he said of his primary school teacher, William Clune. "There was not one person who came into his school yard, from any background, with shoes or without, who wasn't respected as a carrier of wonderment". Isn't this the heart of teaching? You have to question today, irrespective of the desires of teachers, in a country full of tests, results and league tables, whether the teacher is allowed the time to see every single child as "a carrier of wonderment".

After working for a number of years as a clerk with the Electricity Supply Board, he became the first member of his family to go to university. It was here that he began to articulate the deep sense of social justice and hunger for equality that he had developed as a young man. In a website dedicated to him here, (and by the way, do try and listen to his acceptance speech found on the site's home page, it is wonderful. Don't be put off by his speaking in Gaelic to begin with, as after a few moments he speaks in English),  it describes Michael D as a young academic, striving to ensure that people of a similar background to himself had the opportunity to access education, and travelled with colleagues to towns and villages throughout the West of Ireland providing outreach courses. "The social exclusion, emigration and poverty that he experienced and witnessed led him to more direct political involvement, where he could argue and advocate for real change, both social and economic".

Michael D is a strong Republican and Socialist, and has never been afraid to challenge anyone, including the Leadership of his own Labour Party, when he felt that injustice, equality and poverty were not being addressed. He is a powerful and intellectual speaker who stands up bravely for what he believes. In his life he has shown his passion for politics, the Arts and sport. The link above gives more details about his achievements, which have been considerable. But it's his fight for the elimination of poverty in Ireland that is the one area that I am particularly drawn to. He talks about a "citizenship floor" or a "social floor", which is the line below which nobody should be allowed to fall. Having listened to all of the clips on You Tube relating to Michael D, I've chosen the following one on his opposing the Irish Governments proposal to reduce the minimum wage. It is powerful, passionate and shows the true heart of the man.



So this is Michael D Higgins, the 9th President of Ireland. The presidency is of course largely a ceremonial office, but the President does exercise certain limited powers with absolute discretion. The President however, does seem to me to represent the face of Ireland, both at home, and abroad. Though the President, traditionally does not criticise the Government, I cannot see Michael D keeping quiet when proposals are brought forward to reduce even further the level of the "social floor". My Son in his blog said, "When President Higgins moves into the Aras an Uachtarain, the Presidential Palace in Dublin's Phoenix Park, he will have a considerable task in transforming the view currently taken of Ireland as a broken country. I believe he will succeed". And so do I. Michael D Higgins rose from humble beginnings, to one of the highest positions in the land; his time as President will certainly not lack excitement.

Ernest Bevin

In thinking about the new President, my thoughts turned to stalwarts in British political life, who similarly rose from humble beginnings to achieve positions of power in the post Second World War Government of Clement Attlee.

One such was Ernest Bevin.  He was born in the village of Winsford in Somerset in 1881. His father was unknown, and he was orphaned at the age of eight due to his mother's death, and went to live with his half-sister in Devon. He only ever had about two years of formal education, and at the age of eleven, he became a farm labourer.

At age 18 he moved to Bristol and became a van driver. During this period he became interested in Non-conformist religion, and for a while was a Baptist lay preacher, where his oratorical skills came to the fore. He began work at Bristol Docks, and joined the Dockers' Union, and by the age of 30 was one of its paid officials. He was also a member of the Labour Party.

The following year, he gained a nationwide reputation by making a speech before the Transport Workers' Court of Inquiry that resulted in a standard minimum wage for British dockworkers. A year later he was responsible for merging 32 smaller unions into the Transport and General Workers' Union, and became general secretary for nearly 20 years. In 1940 he joined Winston Churchill's coalition government as Minister of Labour and National Service. After the war, he became Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs in Clement Attlee's government, and although controversial, he gained a deserved reputation across the world. Not bad for a child from a poor single mother, orphaned at eight, having two years of formal education, and starting his working life at 11. Rising from humble beginnings indeed.

Herbert Morrison

Herbert Morrison was born in Lambeth, London in 1888. His father was a police constable. As a baby, he lost the sight in his right eye due to infection.

He had little formal education, and left school at the age of 14, and became an errand boy at a local grocer's shop.

His early politics has been described as radical, and he briefly flirted with the Social Democratic Federation, before becoming a member of the Independent Labour Party.

In World War One he was a conscientious objector, and was involved with a pacifist movement. During the war he worked in a market garden in Letchworth.

In Attlee's post Second World War Government, he held a number of senior cabinet positions, such as Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary, and Deputy Prime Minister.

Again, not bad for someone from humble beginnings and little education, who would rise to the top.

Aneurin Bevan

One of the giants of 20th Century politics. Aneurin Bevan was born in 1897 in Tradegar, South Wales. His father was a coal miner, and life was hard for any mining family, and the Bevan's, with ten children, were no exception.

Bevan left school aged 13, and like his father, went to work in the mines. He was an activist from an early age, and through the trade union, at the age of 19 he became the head of his local Miners' Lodge.

Management at the pit saw him as a troublemaker, because of his activism, and at one point sacked him, only to have to much later give him his job back. He was a strong socialist, who fought for the rights of the working man. In the lead up to the 1945 General Election he said, "We have been the dreamers, we have been the sufferers, now we are the builders. We enter this campaign at this general election, not merely to get rid of the Tory majority. We want the complete political extinction of the Tory Party".

After the election victory, Clement Attlee made Bevan Minister of Health. In spite of strong opposition from the British Medical Association and others, he steered through the Bill that resulted in the National Health Service coming into being on the 5th July 1948. The NHS along with the Welfare State was one of the most important developments in post-war Britain, as it helped those who could least afford to help themselves. As someone said, "The whole ideology behind the NHS clearly fitted in with what Bevan believed in - helping the working class". Not bad for someone from such humble beginnings.

So Higgins, Bevin, Morrison and Bevan all came from humble beginnings; their early path into politics may have been slightly different, but they all rose up from those humble beginnings because they wanted to make a difference in the world for everyone, but in particular, a difference to those who felt disenfranchised - the working class.

My question to finish with is this, "Can people from humble beginnings in Britain today, rise to the top in politics?". In my view the nature of politics has changed. Where once it was seen as service, now it is seen as a career path. Yes there are still people in Parliament from "the old school", but they've been there for years, and no long carry much weight even within their own party.

Over the years, the route into politics for many from humble beginnings was the trade union movement or local government. With the arrival of Margaret Thatcher, we began to see the beginning of real de-industrialisation with the closing of coal mines, ship yards and the car industry. Along with this came the centralisation and gradual decimation of local government.

With millions out of work, the power and place of the trade union was diminished, and fewer opportunities existed in local government. The opportunities for those with little formal education became less, and a more "professional" class of politician came to the fore. This subject deserves more time given to it that I can give here, so I recommend you read the finest book on the subject I've come across, which was published earlier this year, and which I've just finished reading. It's by Owen Jones, called, "Chavs: The Demonization of the working class".

The whole system is stacked against those from humble beginnings rising to position of power and influence. Former London Mayor, Ken Livingstone regrets the "abolition of the traditional council structure where working class people got elected, learned via committees how things are run, and then went to Parliament. That's gone ... There's a lot of people that used to be on Lambeth Council or Camden Council who weren't terribly good in terms of literacy and numeracy, but loved representing their area, and could work the machine and the council. They didn't have to have bloody A-levels or degrees to do it. In that sense the barriers against the working class are stronger now, not because an aristocratic elite is keeping them out, but because a sort of middle-class layer has introduced too many qualifications, rules and regulations".

Following the 2010 election, 1 in 20 MP's came from blue-collar backgrounds; 1 in 10 MP's had a background in financial services; 1 in 5 MP's had already worked in politics before taking the Parliamentary oath. This was mostly in the role of unpaid research assistants, which you can only do if you have money behind you to cover your costs. Perhaps the last MP in the modern era who rose from humble beginnings to near the top was John Prescott. He was the son of a railway signalman, who failed his 11 plus, and joined the Merchant Navy as a waiter. We all know of the scorn that was constantly directed at him within Parliament and within the right-wing press, and this has continued since his elevation to the House of Lords. The class war is alive and well, and is directed against those from a humble, working class background.

I am thrilled to see Ireland appoint Michael D Higgins as its 9th President, but I fear that Britain will never again see the calibre of such men as Bevin, Morrison or Bevan.

I started this blog with Michael D Higgins, so let me finish on a lighter note, and show you something of another side to him - that of poet. Perhaps the clip below will give you a flavour of his work, as he reads a poem about his Father, then talks about it.

Statistics - what to make of them

We've all heard the saying I'm sure, that "There are Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics". However, statistics do play an important part in everyday life.

But what to make of them, is always the question. I've compiled and distributed statistics for years, and I am well aware of how you can manipulate them to your own ends. When I say manipulate, I don't mean to tell lies; I mean to put the most positive spin on them, and hope that no one wants to look too closely at anything surrounding those statistics.

This is an important subject, for central and local government are constantly seeking to present statistics in such a way that shows life under them is better than under previous administrations, and that our lives as local citizens is not as bad as some people want to make out. But what to make of such statistics, and do we fully understand them? I've been thinking of where recent statistics in Ireland (but examples could be taken from anywhere) are being shown to illustrate an improvement in particular situations. But what to make of them when you delve a little deeper.

A couple of days ago, I was reading an article on the Irish Left Review web site (I read the Irish Left Review because I'm interested in Socialism and Ireland). It was written by Stephanie Lord on the subject of abortion in Ireland. Before going any further, it is worth noting that abortion is illegal in Ireland unless the pregnancy is in threat of endangering the life of the woman. Incidentally, it's still illegal in Northern Ireland as well.

The UK Department of Health have issued statistics over the last nine years showing a decline in the numbers of women giving Irish addresses when accessing abortion services in Britain. The 2010 figures were released at the beginning of this week, revealing that 4,402 women gave Irish addresses to British clinics. This was another decrease over last year.

Pro-Life campaigners have called it an "astonishing drop over the years", with Dr Stephanie O'Keeffe, Acting Director of Ireland's Crisis Pregnancy Programme, praising the figures, saying that "The numbers are actually very low by international standards. We have been bucking the trend compared to other countries, where abortion numbers and rates have been increasing". Pro-Choice campaigners take the opposite view, and question whether these statistics actually tell us anything about abortion rates in Ireland. So, what to make of the statistics. Do they give a true, clear picture, or will closer inspection show a different story?

The 2010 figure represents a drop of 20 on the previous year - a decline of 0.5%.  This is hardly remarkable given the scale of the numbers. Let's have a look at possible reasons for the numbers, and whether the actual figures could be much higher.

1. Emigration - there were fewer Irish people living in Ireland last year than the previous year. The Irish Government's Central Statistics Office shows that emigration among Irish nationals increased significantly in the year, from 18,400 in April 2009, to 27,700 in 2010. "This is the highest level of net migration since 1989". There were 20 less registered Irish women going to Britain for an abortion, but there were 27,700 less Irish people in the country.
2. Poorer Households - the financial crisis of 2008 is still affecting the Irish economy severely. Ireland now has the highest level of household debt relative to disposable income in the developed world at 190%. About 50% of households are suffering negative equity positions on their family homes. The cost of travelling to Britain, Spain or the Netherlands can be beyond the reach of many working class women.
3. Giving false addresses - the figure of 4,402 is only those women who gave Irish addresses to British clinics. There is no idea of how many may have gone to other countries, or how many gave false addresses in Britain to perhaps protect their anonymity. The figure is therefore based on limited information, and should almost certainly be a lot higher.
4. Buying over the Internet - the organisation Choice Ireland submitted a Freedom of Information request that revealed that the Irish Customs authorities had seized 1,216 abortion tablets in 62 operations that had been ordered over the Internet. How many more got into the country undetected, we'll never know. (For example, the UK Border Agency admit that they only seize about 1% of heroin and cocaine coming to the UK). The tablets seized in Ireland were destined to provide 1,216 abortions. Everyone is agreed how possibly dangerous to health and life this procedure is. Research has shown that between 50% - 90% of all medicines sold on websites which conceal their address are fake. You just don't know what's in the tablets. But desperate people take desperate measures.
5. Buying over the counter - in a Sunday Mirror Ireland article, January 2011, Samuel Hamilton reports that abortion pills (though illegal) are on sale in some supermarkets across Ireland. Two years ago, a Chinese woman was convicted and fined for importing and selling the pills in her Dublin store. Niall Behan, of the Irish Family Planning Association, believes we have barely scratched the surface of the problem. "I believe that these drugs are still on sale in Ireland, and I think this can be backed up from the fact the Irish Medicines Board confiscated so many of them last year".
6. Backstreet abortions - understandably there are few facts and figures for this, but anecdotal reports indicate that at least an element of this goes on.

Stephanie Lord says, "The idea that the number of women travelling to Britain for abortions is the sum total of Irish women actually having abortions would be laughable if it weren't so tragic. The reality of the situation for women in Ireland is much more disturbing".

Don't just accept statistics. You should dissect, examine and place them in context. The official Irish abortion figures are not what they seem. This is often the case with a whole range of statistical information. How we use figures and words is so very important. Let's close with Lewis Carroll.

"When I use a word", Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone. "It means just what I choose it to mean - neither more or less".

"The question is", said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things".

"The question is", said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master - that's all".

Irish Socialism and Royal Visits



Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, President, Mary McAleese, Queen Elizabeth



"Some men, faint-hearted, ever seek
Our programme to retouch,
And will insist, whene'er they speak
That we demand too much.
'Tis passing strange, yet I declare
Such statements give me mirth,
For our demands most moderate are,
We only want the earth".

James Connolly


Last week Queen Elizabeth made an 'iconic', 'extraordinary', 'hugely symbolic' four day visit to Ireland. The Irish Times described her visit to Croke Park as a "watershed moment in Anglo-Irish relations". It said of the wreath-laying ceremony at the Garden of Rememberance, that it was "the moment many thought they would never see". Martina Devlin, writing in the Irish Independent said, "I don't know if the men and women who struggled for Irish freedom would have been moved by her salute or surprised by it. But I can't imagine that they would have been indifferent".

It's hard to gage the mood of the people of Ireland concerning the visit. There were protests on a small scale which seemed to have been quelled very rapidly by the Garda. But of the population as a whole, little is known. Dublin's Evening Herald said, "There were no flags, no banners and few cheers as the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh were whisked past by a fleet of outriders and a long motorcade of black cars". Though the columnist Eamonn Carr said that the Queen "played a blinder" during her visit. As to the lasting legacy of this visit we'll have to wait and see. It was certainly an opportunity for the 'great and the good' of Ireland to dust down those suits, join in the specially invited occasions and pay fawning homage to a foreign Monarch.

Much has been made of the fact that it has been nearly 100 years since the last Royal visit. This was in July 1911, when George V came to an Ireland that was part of the British Empire, and would remain so until Independence was gained in 1922.

King George V in Ireland, July 1911

Royalty stands for all that is unequal in society, and nothing sees this more clearly than socialism. I don't think that enough people remember that the fight for independence from British rule, was also a fight for social equality. No one could doubt that particularly in the early 1900's, Ireland was largely bereft of social justice, and the plight of the workers was not being addressed. The war for independence came to a head in 1916 (though it would be another six years before independence was gained), with the Easter Uprising, where Irishmen took over the main Post Office in Dublin. This was short lived however, as the rebellion was quickly dealt with by the British Army, resulting in over 400 deaths, and the execution of the leaders. The fight for social justice and Irish feedom had been long and hard, and one man who was prominent in both was the Socialist, James Connolly.

James Connolly

He was born in Edinburgh on the 5th June 1868 to Irish parents, and became active in the Socialist movement in that city in the early 1890's. He came to Ireland in 1896 and founded the Irish Socialist Republican Party. In 1902 he lectured on socialism in Britain and the US. He emigrated to America in 1903, and became a member of the Socialist Labour Party (US) and the Industrial Workers of the World, founding the Irish Socialist Federation in New York in 1907.

He returned to Ireland in 1910 as organiser for The Socialist Party of Ireland, and became Belfast organiser of the Irish Transport and General Workers Union in the same year.

In 1914 he was Commandant of the Irish Citizen Army, and Commandant General of Dublin Division of the Army of the Republic in 1916. He was executed by the British on the 12th May 1916 for his part in the Easter Uprising earlier that year. The manner of his execution outraged many (he was carried on a stretcher from hospital, tied to a chair and shot, then with others put in a mass grave without a coffin), and it was said that this gained the movement more followers than his life.

James Connolly Statue in Dublin

I cannot identify with his militant fight for freedom, as I haven't been in that position, and honestly don't know what I would do if I was. I can however identify with his fight for social justice.

I have no doubt that his social conscience was first aroused as a result of his mother dying at an early age due to the deprivation they faced in the slums of Edinburgh. This was in an area known as "Little Ireland".

Prior to the visit of King George V to Ireland in July 1911, he addressed the workers of Ireland on that visit, and though now 100 years old, the message still resonates with me as being at the heart of true socialism.

Though it has been reproduced many times before, I make no apology for reproducing it again.




"Fellow Workers, as you are aware from reading the daily and weekly newspapers, we are about to be blessed with a visit from King George V. Knowing from previous experience of Royal Visits, as well as from the Coronation orgies of the past few weeks, that the occasion will be utilised to make propaganda on behalf of royalty and aristocracy against the oncoming forces of democracy and National freedom, we desire to place before you some few reasons why you should unanimously refuse to countenance this visit, or to recognise it by your presence at the attendant processions or demonstrations. We appeal to you as workers, speaking to workers, whether your work be that of the brain or of the hand - manual or mental toil - it is of you and your children we are thinking; it is your cause we wish to safeguard and foster.

The future of the working class requires that all political and social positions should be open to all men and women; that all privileges of birth or wealth be abolished, and that every man or woman born into this land should have an equal opportunity to attain to the proudest position in the land. The Socialist demands that the only birthright necessary to qualify for public office should be the birthright of our common humanity.

Believing as we do that there is nothing on earth more sacred than humanity, we deny all allegience to this institution of royalty, and hence we can only regard the visit of the King as adding fresh fuel to the fire of hatred with which we regards the plundering institutions of which he is the representative. Let the capitalist and landlord class flock to exalt him; he is theirs; in him they see embodied the idea of caste and class; they glorify him and exalt his importance that they might familiarise the public mind with the conception of political inequality, knowing well that a people mentally poisoned by the adulation of royalty can never attain to that spirit of self-reliant democracy necessary for the attainment of social freedom. The mind accustomed to political kings can easily be reconciled to social kings - capitalist kings of the workshop, the mill, the railway, the ships and the docks. Thus coronation and king's visits are by our astute neversleeping masters made into huge imperialist propagandist campaigns in favour of political and social schemes against democracy. But if our masters and rulers are sleepless in their schemes against us, so we, rebels against their rule, must never sleep in our appeal to our fellows to maintain as publicly our belief in the dignity of our class - in the ultimate sovereignty of those who labour.

What is monarchy? From whence does it derive its sanction? What has been its gift to humanity? Monarchy is a survival of the tyranny imposed by the hand of greed and treachery upon the human race in the darkest and most ignorant days of our history. It derives its only sanction from the sword of the marauder, and the helplessness of the producer, and its gifts to humanity are unknown, save as they can be measured in the pernicious examples of triumphant and shameless iniquities.

Every class in society, save royalty, and especially British royalty, has through some of its members contributed something to the elevation of the race. But neither in science, nor in art, nor in literature, nor in exploration, nor in mechanical invention, nor in humanising of laws, nor in any sphere of human activity has a representative of British royalty helped forward the moral, intellectual or material improvement of mankind. But that royal family has opposed every forward move, fought every reform, persecuted every patriot, and intrigued against every good cause. Slandering every friend of the people, it has befriended every oppressor. Eulogised today by misguided clerics, it has been notorious in history for the revolting nature of its crimes. Murder, treachery, adultery, incest, theft, perjury - every crime known to man has been committed by some one or other of the race of monarchs from whom King George is proud to trace his descent.

"His blood
Has crept through scoundrels since the flood".

We will not blame him for the crimes of his ancestors if he relinquishes the royal rights of his ancestors; but as long as he claims their rights, by virtue of descent, then, by virtue of descent, he must shoulder the responsibility for their crimes.

Fellow workers, stand by the dignity of your class. All these parading royalties, all this insolent aristocracy, all these grovelling, dirt-eating capitalist traitors, all these are but signs of disease in any social state - diseases which a royal visit brings to a head and spews in all its nastiness before our horrified eyes. But as the recognition of the disease is the first stage towards the cure, so that we may rid our social state of its political and social diseases, we must recognise the elements of corruption. Hence, in bringing them all together and exposing their unity, even a royal visit may help us to understand, and understanding, help us to know how to destroy the royal, aristocratic and capitalist classes who live upon our labour. Their workshops, their lands, their mills, their factories, their ships, their railways must be voted into our hands who alone use them. Public ownership must take the place of capitalist ownership, social democracy replace political and social inequality, the sovereignty of labour must supercede and destroy the sovereignty of birth and the monarchy of capitalism.

Ours be the task to enlighten the ignorant among our class, to dissipate and destroy the political and social superstitions of the enslaved masses and to hasten the coming day when, in the words of Joseph Brenan, the fearless patriot of 1948, all the world will maintain

'The Right Divine of Labour

To be first of earthly things;

That the Thinker and the Worker

Are Manhood's only Kings'".

James Connolly, like many before and after him (myself included at times) was told to moderate his demands - they are too extreme. His response was a revolutionary song written in 1907, "We only want the earth". This blog started with the first stanza, and the final stanza says,

"For labour long, with sighs and tears,

To its oppressors knelt.

But never yet, to aught save fears,

Did the heart of tyrant melt.

We need not kneel, our cause no dearth

Of loyal soldiers' needs

And our victorious rallying cry

Shall be we want the earth".

Click this link to see the whole song. http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/1907/xx/wewnerth.htm