Letters

Spart change

As a former member of the Spartacist League/Britain, this letter is based on what I originally wrote to the ‘Neo Spartacist League’ re their change of position on Ireland. I was replying last summer to a motion published in Spartacist No70, in May 2025, but their promised reply has not materialised. The author of the original Spartacist ‘Theses on Ireland’ (Spartacist No24, Autumn 1977) has also challenged their change of line in a letter that also remains publicly unanswered.

I wrote that the article in Spartacist by E McColgan on Ireland was a mea culpa to Irish nationalism of the most populist form. This she did to sever any connection to the old Spartacist League position on interpenetrated peoples, in their quest to gain acceptance into the family of the left.

To say the old SL/B accepted partition or were against a united Ireland is based on pure nationalist logic and the concept that nothing has changed since the foundation of the Irish state. Of course, every Irish nationalist and his dog knows that to resolve the Irish question you have to deal with the ‘Protestant question’. It will not be done by quoting Wolfe Tone that Protestants are Irish, or rolling out James Connolly, which all and sundry do on this island, to give themselves a left cover. Imperialism imposed partition alongside the communalist divisions now existing in the north. As communists, we fought against them.

However Marxists deal in realities and seek a solution which benefits the working class (Protestant or Catholic). We don’t treat the Protestants as a bloc as one class, but as trans-class, and hence aim to win advanced workers among them to a communist formation in which they can smash partition and unite Ireland under working class leadership. We would hope that could be done within a socialist federation of these islands. This leaves it open where the Protestants fall - we don’t seek to force them into a united Ireland: we are not nationalist irredentists.

A bourgeois nationalist approach might well result in a reversal of the terms of oppression, or at least the genuine fear of that, thus risking driving significant sectors of the Protestant working class back into the grip of loyalist reaction.

As Lenin said, “The several demands of democracy, including self-determination, are not an absolute, but only a small part of the general-democratic [now general-socialist] world movement. In individual cases the part may contradict the whole. If so, it must be rejected” (Collected works volume 22).

We seek a Marxist solution, not the nationalist one which McColgan now propagates. Of course, to tar the old SL with the Militant position is beneath contempt: anyone reading Spartacist 24 can see it holds up to the test of time. So why did she uphold it for all her years in the SL, when she offers no critical analysis for her repudiation. The Sparts’ adhesion to nationalism is plainly seen in their support for a referendum on Irish unity. This is the policy of Sinn Féin - included in the Good Friday agreement to get it over the line and placate those with doubts. It is entirely within the power of the UK whether a referendum is granted or not.

First the referendum, then their “united workers’ republic” - which, by the way, most republican groups call for in one way or another. This is what the neo-Sparts and McColgan will campaign for in Ireland, with an appeal to Protestants ‘not to go down with a sinking ship’: such faith in nationalism. I am sorry to say this, but she is a flea on a nationalist donkey.

Of course, there are Irish people who want a referendum. However, among the majority of the working class it is not a talking point. Workers seek to survive in a state which is seething with class anger from the cost of housing/lack of hospital beds, waiting lists (700,000 at present), class sizes the highest in Europe, the worst transport system in Europe, etc. The Financial Times has described Ireland as “a first-world economy with third-world infrastructure”. The last election ran on economic issues - this was the electorate’s concern.

Only a communist organisation with a clear programme will be able to appeal to those advanced Protestant workers, as James Larkin did in 1907 - or more recently, as was done in 2024 with the strike of 150,000 workers, which brought the north to a halt. Tie that into the massive disgruntlement in the south and you have the basis for class unity and potentially setting a flame, which could ignite a spark for our class in Britain.

The new world order puts Ireland in the crosshairs; it cannot rely on its old strategy for investments from the US, whose companies at present make up the bulk of the Irish tax base - a tax haven for them, but for how long in Trump’s new world order if they pull out, leaving the working class to foot the bill?

The Sparts’ new programme seeks nothing better than a referendum on Irish unity - capitalist at that – while, like all nationalists, sticking their head in the sand re the Protestants. No different from all who went before them. For those who seek to actually change history, I suggest you read for yourself Spartacist 24 and you will see it stands the test of time.

Patrick Sliney
County Wicklow

YP and AI

It has become abundantly clear that the Your Party Scottish working party that I wrote about in a letter to the Weekly Worker on May 14 only exists as a figment of Karie Murphy’s bureaucratic imagination. To further highlight this I made my first foray into AI image generation and this has raised a number of issues that I feel are worth exploring.

First up, by attempting to find an alternative to the tech billionaires’ models, I asked the politically, ethically and environmentally sound AI platform recommended by Tech for Palestine, called Thaura (Arabic for ‘revolution’). It suggested some open-source models - in particular Stable Diffusion - so I tried to generate an image based upon the classic look of The Invisible Man movies: crepe bandages, sunglasses and fedora hat as a group of eight. This grouping was supposedly sortitioned from the Scottish membership, but clearly does not exist except as invisible comrades!

I thought to add a few ‘See you, Jimmy’ hats and wigs to make fun of the stereotype jocks that the Corbyn clique were patronising with this claimed way forward for YP Scotland. It was a tricky business to image-generate and turned out pretty naff as an image, but it obviously goaded enough to be removed and get me barred from the unofficial YP Scotland Facebook page for not following the community guidelines I didn’t know existed but had apparently signed up to!

Undaunted, I tried again and found Chat GPT much easier to work with and was impressed by the ability to create a mood, as well as a literal image, based upon a simple text outline. The group started as characters from the era of HG Wells’ original story, but were easily brought into the present day and I couldn’t resist adding a further dimension of a guess as to who was the puppet mistress manipulator. More pleased with the result and the possibilities for such simple political satire, I posted this on social media and around relevant Scottish WhatsApp groups.

As could be expected, most people have moved on from seeing any relevance in Your Party as a credible force, but several comrades in the Marxist Caucus Community (almost all as deep-fried nationalist as any around YPS) took great exception to even daring to use AI as a creative tool, especially as a leftist. Apparently this was a betrayal of the skills of comrades in creative fields and we should “cringe, no matter if left or right uses it”.

We had a bit of banter back and forth on it all, with further accusations of how environmentally damaging AI is, but - as is the way with such debates - less and less light was shed with each exchange and more resorting to just plain jibes, ending with: “Tam, your ability to die on hills is laudable” and “It’s also just really, really crappy agit-prop, dude”.

Not a word from any of them on the content: ie, that the Corbyn clique were now just literally making things up as they went along and thus deserved exposure. Instead the plans afoot for an out-and-out nationalist rival to the Scottish Socialist Party are gathering pace with as little to offer the working class as the aforementioned YPS monstrosity.

Meanwhile, in the real world, we see hugely relevant debates on the growing use of AI as political tools. First and foremost there is the phenomena of the Lego animation videos generated since March this year as a searing critique of the US and Israeli war on Iran. Produced by Iranian students working anonymously under the umbrella of ‘Explosive Media’, they have become an internet sensation, viewed and shared by millions across the world - except in Iran itself, where an internet blackout has been endured by the masses there throughout the war.

The ability to produce such rapid-response visual content, combined with American-accented rap music narrations of often difficult concepts, such as the profound effect of sanctions on Iran, has a parallel in the direct military sphere of cheap drone warfare. These asymmetric new tools display a democratisation of force, cost effectiveness and technological disruption that are changing the nature of modern warfare (whilst, of course, not being the decisive factors in winning the war).

But what had been previously disparaged as “Slopaganda” when employed by Trump’s team - remember the crass and dreadful AI images about the ‘Gaza Riviera’ - has become hugely memorable content in the Lego animations ‘punching up’ against those forces.

In the language of today there has been optimisation for algorithmic circulation. The new digital influence operates through decentralised amplification, where users themselves become agents of dissemination, shifting narratives into public digital spaces shaped by visibility and engagement.

I’m not, of course. comparing my paltry efforts so far with the genius of the Lego animations, but there is an aim to at least be on the same Zeitgeist spectrum. I’ve previously explored how to apply AI help on an agit-prop project, involving updating a 1920s street theatre sketch about imprisoned Indian trade unionists. This was called ‘Meerut’ and our Workers Theatre Movement of the late 1980s was adapted by Jack Conrad to fit the 20th anniversary of British troops going into the Six Counties under a Labour government. Comrade Jack certainly didn’t consider himself a playwright, but it was the politics that mattered, combined with chants in unison, behind bars made from wooden banner poles and the main call for solidarity.

“Comrades, hands across the sea!” That made for a powerful agit-prop sketch. With the assistance of the Thaura AI model, the sketch was updated for today, with a call for solidarity with the imprisoned youth who have taken action against Israel arms manufacturers. If this be termed agit-slop, so be it. We will use whatever means are at our disposal to fight for the politics we need and to expose the lies and mediocrity holding us back.

As with all the limitations and difficulties imposed by the capitalist mode of production, we circumvent and navigate as best we can, rather than cretinously carp on the sidelines, offering nothing. And, even on the environmental aspects raised against the use of AI, things are not nearly as simplistic as suggested. For example, there have been studies showing that, in both text and image generation, human carbon emissions still far exceed those produced by AI equivalents.

AI can and must be used as a tool to help avert climate catastrophe and, above all, to help make revolution on a world scale.

Tam Dean Burn
Glasgow

Christian lens

In recent years, I’ve been interested in learning more about religious tradition and historical materialism - two schools of thought which seem contradictory on a surface level. Of course, historical-materialist analysis divides society into categories of base and superstructure, arguing that the former, which represents the economic foundation, primarily determines the latter, which represents the ideological system. Thus, the classic Marxist view is that religion, as part of the superstructure, will wither away, as the base changes and it no longer serves an ideological purpose.

Friedrich Engels expressed this consensus perspective in his 1877 text, Anti-Dühring: “All religion, however, is nothing but the fantastic reflection in men’s minds of those external forces which control their daily life,” he wrote. “When society, by taking possession of all means of production and using them on a planned basis, has freed itself and all its members from the bondage … only then will the last alien force which is still reflected in religion vanish; and with it will also vanish the religious reflection itself, for the simple reason that then there will be nothing left to reflect.”

Following the totalitarian experience of the Soviet Union, when state atheism was so often used in Red Scare propaganda, I believe a more accommodating socialist relationship to religion would be productive. The American socialist pioneer, Eugene Debs, has long been an inspiration to me and I think his example in this respect could be a good model. While he was suspicious of organised religion, he peppered his political commentary with biblical references and had a portrait of Jesus of Nazareth hanging in his cell during his imprisonment for opposing World War I.

There’s a famous quote, that I understand to be somewhat apocryphal, frequently attributed to the anarchist, Emma Goldman, which goes: “If I can’t dance, it’s not my revolution.” In a similar vein, I would argue: if I can’t pray, it’s not my revolution. This is not only because I feel a genuine pull to spirituality, which I think anyone should be free to pursue, but also because I think government crackdowns on religion of the kind seen in the Soviet Union are indicative of a wider authoritarianism, which will ultimately move beyond spiritual communities and impact the whole of society.

While I’m not an academic, reconciling religious tradition and historical materialism doesn’t actually seem too difficult theoretically. What would be required is for the spiritual perspective to concede that specific forms of religious expression are influenced by a society’s base. Meanwhile, the historical-materialist view would have to acknowledge that at least some people have an innate drive toward spiritual life. Admittedly, this would be quite hard in practice for many, perhaps most, representatives of both schools of thought. However, it seems achievable for more open-minded thinkers.

For instance, these days, I think of myself as a Christian perennialist, by which I mean I feel most at home in the Christian tradition, but interpret it through the lens of perennialism. If readers are unfamiliar with the term, perennialism is the belief that all religious traditions are describing a single, universal truth; differences between faiths can be ascribed to different cultural filters, through which seekers perceive that truth. Mapping historical materialism over this outlook appears fairly easy. I would argue that these cultural filters, which might be called the superstructure, are largely determined by the base.

Jon Hochschartner
Connecticut

Spanish left

The results of the elections in Andalucía were announced last week. Unsurprisingly, they characterised the current situation in Spanish politics.

Firstly, there was the continued growth in popularity of the far right and the increasing support for Vox. Although the conservative People’s Party (PP) won 53 of the available 109 parliamentary seats, it didn’t hold onto its majority to govern independently. As in the autonomous communities of Extremadura and Aragón, where elections have been held over the past eight months, the PP is now entering into agreements with Vox to govern. Winning 16 seats - an increase of one seat from the last election - Vox’s brutal anti-immigration stance and its “national priority” perspective, which insists that public services are allocated to people with a “verifiable” connection to Spain, were powerful enough to win the support of around 14% of the electorate.

Secondly, there was the continued historical collapse of the vote of the Spanish Socialist Workers Party (PSOE). Despite the popularity of the anti-Trump and anti-war rhetoric of Spain’s president and PSOE leader Pedro Sánchez on a national level, this simply wasn’t translated to the autonomous level. Once a bastion in this region, the PSOE won only 28 seats (23% of the vote) - two seats fewer than in the same election four years ago and the party’s worst result in the post-Franco era. It also marked its fourth consecutive loss in autonomous elections. Obviously, this is far from good news for the PSOE and doesn’t bode well for the party’s prospects in the country’s general election next year - something that the left outside of the PSOE is aware of and is currently trying to exploit.

And it is the performance of the left that deserves a particular mention. Por Andalucia (PA), a coalition of left and green organisations led by the Communist Party of Spain’s Antonio Maíllo, won four seats, equalling the number it obtained four years ago. This election was something of a test for many of the left in Spain in the run-up to next year’s general election, where it is proposed to present a similar electoral coalition - Un Paso al Frente (One Foot Forward) - in an effort to overcome the fragmentation of left forces in the country and somehow unite the left. It made no significant progress.

What was interesting was the performance of Adelante Andalucía (AA), the other leftwing organisation in the election campaign. Despite standing on fundamentally the same electoral platform as PA - better housing, wages and the advance of democratic rights - its appeal for greater sovereignty for Andalucía (without advocating breaking away from Madrid) attracted a significant number of votes: over 400,000 and nearly 10% of the electorate. It won eight seats - an increase of six from the 2021 elections. Particularly noteworthy was the declaration by its leader José Ignacio García (triumphant on the night) for a “fresh left” - an independent party for the Spanish working class - and the need for an anti-capitalist “transformative” programme. He also rejected the notion of entering any future power-sharing coalition government with the PSOE.

Both PA and AA are standing in next year’s general election. According to Maíllo, PA wishes to do “progressive” “state politics” and to fight for a “state left”. AA will fight on a platform of “progressive federalism”. The question remains, however, how will the Spanish working class unite? And, more importantly, on what “progressive state” or “transformative” programme?

Paul Davies
Málaga

Soviet pop

Think about Russia, before glasnost and perestroika - what springs to mind? Perhaps it’s lumbering parades of warheads, promising mutually assured destruction, men in great coats and their ushanka hats … or is it bread queues outside Gum, snaking across Red Square?

This was around the same time as the ‘red wedge’ movement in the UK - whose iconic artwork was designed by Neville Brody, with more than a passing nod to the Bolshevik movement and the 1919 poster by El Lissitzky, ‘Beat the whites with a red wedge’. The movement in the UK successfully blended pop culture with grassroots activism, with the likes of The Communards, Tom Robinson, The Smiths, The Style Council and the ubiquitous Billy Bragg declaring ‘power in a union’ and how ‘we are joined in the ideological cuddle …’ But what was happening behind the Iron Curtain?

While the official state-sanctioned music was highly policed, with bands requiring state sanction to play or record - meaning they had to fit the message the state wished to project - there was a thriving sub-culture of underground artists who sought out and aggressively absorbed western influences, filtering them through their own socio-political realities.

Here you will find post-punk and ‘new wave’ sound, heavily influenced by bands like Joy Division and The Cure, with groups like Kino, led by the iconic Viktor Tsoi, Televizor and Kofe crafting melancholic, synthesiser-driven and at times minimalist tracks, reflecting the feelings of the brutalist landscape and perceived hopelessness around them. Then there is Soviet rock, with bands like Aquarium, the pioneers of Soviet rock/folk-fusion, and Alisa, blending poetic, subversive lyrics with energetic rock compositions.

Next we find the underground punk movement - nihilistic sounds with outfits like DK and Grazhdanskaya Oborona (which translates as ‘Civil Defence’), creating raw, fast and highly politicised music that operated as direct, anti-establishment protest. Not perhaps what you would expect from music so highly controlled, but it was most certainly there - pushing the limits, testing the water, challenging state control and the state’s stringent grip on music.

But look even further back in the annals of the Soviet counter-culture, and there you will find all manner of delights (funk, soul, fusion, electronica …), harking back to Devo, Kraftwerk, Florian Schneider, Tangerine Dream and Robert Fripp. At times, soaring rhythms, backbeats and grooves perhaps more akin in places to a stripped-down Studio 54 than to bread queues in Red Square …

Fast forward - perhaps Punk didn’t lead to perestroika, but the changing political climate has ultimately made way for Russian house, trance, hip hop and rap, with tracks such as ‘Mama, I’m a criminal’ by Chingiz Valinurov giving Kneecap vibes, complete with balaclavas and Raus’s track, ‘Putin’, commenting on the president in ways that would have been unheard of not that long ago.

A lot has changed from those days of the May Day parades and the underground sound, from the days of the symbolism of the Bolsheviks penetrating and defeating their opponents, but some things have remained disappointingly unchanged - look up ‘Kiev calling’ by Beton (Joe Strummer would be proud) …

Thelma Clark
email

Beautiful game

For those readers who sometimes escape into the realm of sport, particularly football, we have had a major story involving my hometown team, Middlesbrough FC, just as ‘Spygate’ hit the main news headlines. I am Boro born and bred and was indoctrinated into the local faithful from a young age, so my comments on this cannot be treated as totally unbiased.

A few days prior to the first leg of the English Championship play-off semi-final, Southampton FC were caught spying on a Middlesbrough training session, in breach of competition rules. After protests from the Middlesbrough chairman, the English Football League charged Southampton, who admitted guilt, and an independent panel threw them out of the competition (despite winning over two legs), awarded the tie to Middlesbrough, who were placed in the final - a game worth over £100 million to the winners.

And therein lies the issue. I believe the decision taken, and upheld on appeal, was the correct one, as there are precedents for this course of action. However, I do feel tremendously for most Southampton fans, who had already bought tickets, transport and accommodation for the Wembley final. Their club clearly cheated, assuming a fine was a worthy risk due to the huge financial prize on offer, and the fans were irrelevant to them. I’m also certain the decision by the Boro owner was less about the ‘integrity of the competition’ and much more about the potential financial reward.

Nonetheless, even though I let my season ticket lapse a couple of years ago, I am gutted that Hull won the final, but wish them all the best for next season. I still go to a few home and away games and, whilst I understand the fans at that level are little more than cash cows for rich owners (and the Premier League is another level completely), I can’t shift the irrational love of a football club that is part of where I am from.

Like a growing number of fans, I have shifted to non-league football for my main fix and am a season ticket holder at Redcar Athletic FC. It’s a totally different experience. A match typically has a few hundred fans watching, the chairman knows your name, you can have a beer and stand with opposing fans during the game, chat with players and chip in to help with time wherever you can. The fan base is local, predominantly working class, and this young club proudly calls itself ‘the Steelmen’ to respect our industrial heritage. Your entry fee does make a difference, as there’s no TV money. You really are part of a community at this level.

We have group of us unashamedly ‘of the left’ - social democrats, socialists and communists: a minority, but with anti-fascist banners and T-shirts. The group includes someone whose grandfather was a founder member of the Communist Party in Wales and another who was involved helping shift cash around illegally for the National Union of Mineworkers during the Great Strike. A great bunch and, even though it’s all about the football, there are lots of political discussions taking place, including with those who don’t feel themselves to be overtly political. A place for organic, unforced, political discussion.

However, for the level we have just got promoted to (Northern Premier League) and the region we live in, we have a relatively wealthy backer, though by no means the richest in our league, so it isn’t untainted by money. We’re looking forward to the highest league we have ever been in, having won two promotions in two seasons, going to new grounds, and meeting up with new opponents. That includes the several thousand who go to Bury FC, and the large crowds at FC United of Manchester - a club formed by disaffected Manchester United fans to create a democratic, fan-led club.

It’s not some kind of revolutionary school, but football is a huge part of working-class culture, an arena of debate - an arena where higher levels increasingly price out the working class and also where the class divisions in society are very clear. In the higher leagues, outcomes are increasingly decided by money, disciplinary panels and court cases. At non-league level you feel you can make a difference.

Don’t get me started on the World Cup.

Ian Elcoate
email

Stupid and crass

I was truly appalled and outraged to learn the Songdowon International Children’s Camp of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) has been subjected to sanctions by the Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office of the UK.

On May 11 the FCDO published on its website a statement titled “Sanctions notice: 11 May 2026 regime: Russia”, which duly announced that the children’s camp was subject to sanctions by the UK government, even though it is not actually within the territory of the Russian Federation! Songdowon had the following imposed on it: freeze on assets and making available provisions, trade and transport sanctions and travel bans.

But Songdowon is a children’s camp, not an intercontinental ballistic missile or nuclear complex! It is run by the DPRK, which promotes the noble ideals of international peace, solidarity, amity and friendship among the children of the world. Children from many countries, including the UK and Ireland, have visited the International Children’s Camp.

Apparently these actions had been taken by the British government because the DPRK provided free-of-charge holidays to children from the Donbass. What is so wrong with this? Surely it was a positive and sincere measure of the DPRK to give free holidays to kids from a war zone? In the past the DPRK also gave holidays to children of the former USSR who were affected by the Chernobyl incident.

This action by the British government is as hostile as it is stupid and crass! It should immediately withdraw the sanctions against the Songdowon International Children’s Camp!

Dermot Hudson
London