|
Will
the implementation of the Good Friday Agreement facilitate
the development of class politics? That was the question
being asked by many community activists in the weeks
following the signing of the Agreement. It is a question
that was also on the lips of a number of trade unionists
and political activists from both traditional communities
who are working within the community sector. For many
who live or work within those marginalised communities
of Greater Belfast that are suffering under the grinding
wheels of structural inequality and social injustice,
the political realignment that would facilitate class
politics was of crucial importance.
That
political realignment has not happened. That is not
to say that there has not been a realignment of sorts.
Clearly the political parties represented on the Northern
Ireland Executive that proposed and endorsed the Programme
for Government and the Budget put forward by the Minister
for Finance have reached some measure of social and
economic realignment. Sadly, it is a realignment that
reinforces social division and the continued marginalisation
of the disadvantaged and deprived.
The
Agreement, or at least the political debate and dialogue
that has stemmed from it, has encouraged many of us
to look afresh at how we do politics. If we interpret
class politics as the politics of participative democracy
where the powerless and the disadvantaged work together
to achieve positive social outcomes for their communities,
we could say that the process has already begun. If
we interpret class politics as socialism versus liberalism
and capitalism within the process of representative
democracy, then we haven’t even begun to create
the necessary conditions for that type of political
action. Representative democracy remains caught up
in the tangled skein of constitutional politics and
cultural division, and it appears that the mainstream
Unionist and Nationalist parties have adopted a “Labour
can wait” policy; or to be more blunt, a “Labour
can eff-off policy.
A
number of political representatives and their party
activists who represent marginalised communities are
already working together within and across the constitutional
interface on class issues. They may be diametrically
opposed to each other culturally and constitutionally,
but they are able to work together constructively
to help enrich and enhance the lives of their respective
constituents. There is a healthy measure of realism
in such co-operation, and we need to welcome it and
to encourage more of it. Such co-operation reminds
us that we live in the presence of one another and
that we are of the same social and economic class
facing similar social and economic problems. Human
solidarity is such that we all suffer together and
that, consequently, we must respond to that suffering
together.
The
potential for the development of class politics that
is being cradled within a number of loyalist and nationalist
communities should be validated and supported by socialist
groupings. Some have been very supportive while others
have put out a tentative hand of friendship. Sadly
there are too many elitist socialists who refuse to
believe that anything good can come out of the loyalist
community and are dismissive of the work of loyalist
political and community activists.
This
elitism does nothing to help the long-suffering people
of the New Lodge, Tigers Bay, Mount Vernon, Whitewell,
Ardoyne or Ballysillan. The welfare of our communities
must take precedence over theoretical positions. We
will never be able to dot every “i” or cross
every “t” in each other’s socialist
theory or political programme. This is a fact of life
and we will have to acknowledge that fact and learn
to live with it. We ought to be mature enough to respect
each other’s positions and to validate the positive
outcomes of each other’s programmes.
If
we are to genuinely develop a political process that
will lead to the establishment of a just, equitable
and anti-sectarian society we must stop attacking
each other. None of us are above criticism and constructive
criticism must always be welcomed. But if we are going
to change the face of society we need also to look
for the good that is in each other’s work and,
where we find it, to validate it. In short, we need
to engage in the politics of encouragement and mutual
support. We can all benefit from each other’s
learning and from each other’s experiences
Some
socialists have a tendency to lecture nationalists
and unionists for daring to be what they are - unionists
and nationalists. But nationalism and unionism are
facts of life. The vast majority of people in Belfast
place a great deal of emphasis on their Irishness
or their Britishness, depending on what community
they belong to. That is what the conflict has been
all about and it is unrealistic to ask people to water
down or to give up what they hold dear. It is true
that in the past working class unity has floundered
on the hard rock of constitutional and cultural differences.
But we have moved a long way since then and, if we
can genuinely leave the constitutional issue firmly
with the people to be decided by referenda, both communities
can work together in areas of mutual interest.
The
principle of consent together with legislation to
allow for constitutional referenda ought to free political
parties to concentrate on social and economic issues.
Community workers and political activists from both
the nationalist and loyalist communities have proven
that they can work together constructively on class
issues. Indeed the stronger these activists are in
their own cultural identity and the more they draw
upon their own experiences of deprivation and disadvantage,
the better they are at working confidently with those
from the other community. Political activism at community
level is not based on theory; it is based on practical
experience and is rooted in the community development
process. Those who are critical of political activists
who cherish their sense of either Irishness or Britishness
ought to come alongside us and see just how well we
can work together in achieving positive outcomes for
our communities.
If
we are to move forward towards a process of genuine
class politics we need to consolidate the embryonic
partnership that exists between political activists,
community activists and some trade unionists. The
community sector has held the community infrastructure
in Belfast together during the course of the conflict.
It has been community activists rather than the political
left that has worked tirelessly to combat poverty,
powerlessness, inequality and social exclusion within
the marginalised communities. Any political process
that ignores the contribution of the community sector
will undermine the efforts of those who have the interests
of working class communities at heart.
The
coming together of political activists and community
activists within both loyalist and nationalist communities
is a welcome sign that some of the political parties
are supportive of the community sector. Likewise,
the enthusiastic involvement of community activists
and trade unionists in helping to unionise the community
sector has been encouraging. The political, community
and trade union partnership can provide marginalised
communities with a threefold cord that will not be
easily broken.
The
emergence of class politics is possible. We all need
to work to make it happen.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
