The Marxist case for Welsh independence


Sawel ap Harri

Marxists have oft been accused of hypocrisy when it comes to supporting national movements.

How could Marx and subsequent Marxists support national independence in some cases, such as the Unification of Germany in the 1840s, yet argue against the unification of Italy in the same period?

Were Marx and Engels purely German chauvinists, subject to nationalist prejudices they purported to hate?

The reality is that Marxists are completely consistent when it comes to the national question. Vladimir Ilyich Lenin wrote:

“Whether the Ukraine, for example, is destined to form an independent state is a matter that will be determined by a thousand unpredictable factors. Without attempting idle ‘guesses’, we firmly uphold something that is beyond doubt: the right of the Ukraine to form such a state. We respect this right.”

 The Rights of Nations to Self-Determination.

What is clear is that Marxists will always support the right of each nation to decide whether they want to be independent or not. Whether they support that nation in their aim of independence is another matter.

Marxists do not support independence movements due to feelings of sentimentality but through objectivity. There are no inherently good or bad forms of nationalism; Britishness isn’t inherently regressive and Welshness inherently progressive.

The progressivity (or chauvinism) of each nationalism is dependent on the material conditions of that nation.

Lenin was an avid supporter of Irish independence, stating that “the appalling destitution and sufferings of the Irish peasantry are an example of the lengths to which the landowners and the liberal bourgeoisie of a “dominant” nation will go”.

Thus building on Marx’s ideas of 1867 that the Irish needed Home Rule, Independence from Britain, an agrarian revolution and tariffs on Britain.

Marxists view national movements for independence as a function; a means to an end rather than an end in itself.

If Marxists believe that a nation becoming independent will enhance the possibility of a dictatorship of the proletariat they will support it, if they believe it will lead to no change in the material conditions of that nation (by swapping a foreign ruling class for an indigenous ruling class) they will not support it.

Lenin and Marx supported Irish independence because of the situation in Ireland itself but also because it would help weaken the bourgeois British state. I argue therefore that the Marxist view is completely consistent; national movements are to be supported when they are likely to improve the conditions of the working class, Marxists are ambivalent towards them when they are not likely to do so.

Welsh Independence and Marxism

Welsh Independence should be supported by Marxists; the British state is reactionary and neo-imperialist, intervening militarily in states such as Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq.

Scottish and Welsh independence, coupled with Irish Reunification would be a significant step in weakening British imperialism, a step all socialists should support.

The destruction of the British state would also weaken the USA and their exceptionalist, neo-imperial foreign policies; Britain is after all the USA’s lapdog in Europe.

If Wales were to become independent, on an emotive level there would be a sense of pride, joy and satisfaction that Wales can stand on its own two feet and join the arena of independent states.

Yet, in reality, what difference would it make to the average citizen if the British landowner was changed for a Welsh one? A British boss for a Welsh one? A British ruling class for a Welsh one?

Do we believe that a majority of people in Wales will vote for independence purely on emotive grounds?

People vote for things that they believe will improve their material condition. Marxism gives us a concrete framework on how to improve material conditions and improve the lives of people in Wales and across the globe.

Wales is a poor, post-industrial nation, a loser of globalisation. A move away from an “any old job” mentality, where automation and specialisation is used to improve the lives of its people, rather than the chasing of capital may truly be what the independence movement needs.

Independence should be about the needs of the people living in Wales.

Anti-independence leftists have stressed that the dissolution of the British state would weaken working-class solidarity across the constituent nations of the UK.

Yet to create a link between the British state and solidarity of British workers is a fallacy; British workers are not their state and independence is different to isolationism.

If this was the case Welsh Marxists would never had fought and died alongside their comrades during the Spanish Civil War.

No passive revolution

Those on the left that are in favour of Welsh independence must ensure that the movement maintains a class character and that class politics is a central tenet of the independence campaign.

We must be cautious against what Gramsci calls the “passive revolution”. The passive revolution is something that looks revolutionary on the surface but maintains the same regressive material conditions.

Devolution in Wales is a perfect example of the stifling aims of the passive revolution. Arguably, devolution was never meant to succeed; it is the devolution of the axe rather than a lever to any real, fundamental change.

Cultural reasons alone may be enough to ensure that some people in Wales support independence; especially in Y Fro Gymraeg and Welsh speaking Wales.

Yet, culture on its own is not enough to fight the drive towards “standardisation, regimentation and universal greyness”. A culture and its people must be able to breath, to be nurtured. It’s unlikely that this will be possible in the grey world of neo-liberal capitalist society.

We must ensure that the anti-capitalist left plays a leading role in the independence campaign, drawing inspiration from groups such as The Radical Independence Campaign in Scotland. An independent Wales must be anti-austerity, anti-Trident and offer a real, substantive revolution.

No to British neoliberalism. No to Welsh neoliberalism. Yes to a radical Welsh independence campaign.

Articles via Email

Get instant updates to your inbox


  1. Whether devolution was meant to succeed depends on the true motivation behind it, particularly from the perspective of the British Establishment. Perhaps they agreed to it since it provides something of a safety valve that can misdirect any challenge to the fundamentals of the Establishment’s hegemony in a way that doesn’t threaten it.

  2. Is this guy for real or what?!

    Just a couple of phrases that should send the alarm bells ringing like mad in anyone with any grasp of history:

    He talks about facilitating a “Dictatorship of the Proletariat” in Wales.

    Well, we’ve all seen what Dictatorship means under Marxism in Russia, China, East Germany, Hungary etc, etc; Deification of the State and Leader above all else, crushing of free speech and association, ruthless suppression of any dissent, a failed economic system, and promotion of self-serving party functionaries at the expense of everyone else

    George Orwell summed up Marxism perfectly in that wonderful phrase in Animal Farms: “All pigs are equal, but some pigs are more equal than others”.

    And then this perfect example of Marxist double-think: ” We will always support the right of each nation to decide whether they want to be independent or not. Whether they support that nation in their aim of independence s another matter”.

    Wales needs Marxism like a hole in the head!

    Wales is too small to be riven by such blind and hateful ideological dogma which has FAILED everywhere it has been tried over the past 100 years.

    We need a more co-operative, communitarian model of social and economic development which allows individuals to thrive and prosper whilst also maintaining and developing community and national cohesion.

    • I think, that were he still alive, that Nestor Makhno would have some issues about the claims this guy is making. I agree with you, Wales needs Marxism like it needs a hole in the head, (ice picks notwithstanding).

      Marx died before his ideas were implemented, so he has to remain untainted with the effects accredited to his philosophy as implemented by Lenin and others. Too many see Stalin as the bad guy, but I don’t see that Lenin was any less blood stained, and indeed, proved himself just as ready to use any tactic in the book at oppressing those who didn’t toe the line.

      We could also point to the Spanish Civil War where the Marxists more or less chose the scenario that the Fascists won, a situation they were more comfortable with than if the anarchists had been victorious, and indeed, the Marxist elements spent most of the war doing their level best to undermine the workers’ cause. As far as anarchists are concerned, with ‘friends’ like Marxists, we sure as hell don’t need enemies!

  3. Iesgob Annwyl! I thought that like the murderous madmen, marx, engels, lenin, stalin, pol pot, mao dse dung and others, Marxist Leninism had died. I need to see the revival of this codswallop as much as i need to see hitler resurrected.

    Marxism has two aims: to gain power, and then keep it. We have suffered long enough in Cymru under this anti-democratic belief system. It is not based on reality:

    ”The destruction of the British state would also weaken the USA and their exceptionalist, neo-imperial foreign policies; Britain is after all the USA’s lapdog in Europe.”

    Sadlly, in my opinion, Cymru with its colonial master is leaving the eu. End of influence in Europe. China is anyway the rising international power. A trumpean US may start a nuclear war in Korea, but China would finish it. And talking of China – who of us here would like to live under the Chinese Marxist regime: keep power at any cost.

    Only a small minority of us in Cymru would vote for Marxist madmen. A non-starter!

    I have a strong sense of social justice, but am not a Marxist; i am a nationalist, yet not a nazi.

    We need a new party in Cymru that will champion socially just policies, that will look to a green future, and that recognizes Cymru as Cymru. Such a party would have to replace our present crop of self -satisfied, self-seeking and self righteous Marxist Leninists.

  4. Communist & WelshNash

    I would vote for Marxist madmen because I feel ideologically drawn to a more socially fair society and I am a madman. It doesn’t stop others considered ‘normal’ to promote their Centre Right Conservatism. I for one am delighted that this opinion article has been included as I was starting to be concerned at the direction of travel of the commentators. I am as wary of the Welsh Establishment as I am at the British with jobs for the boys and girls at the expense of the long term health of the indigenous language. Wales is small enough to adapt Marxism. We need co-operative models of business and social enterprises. Wales could end the ‘Keeping up with the Joneses’ mentality which sounds as if it started here. Da Iawn to Nation and to the author for this opinion piece.

  5. I think this gets the ball rolling nicely – it would be very close-minded to try to envision a future Wales without people working through these thought processes and bringing their different areas of opinions and expertise to bear. We are in a very different world now to the times of Marx and Engels – much of their philosophising and back of the envelope economic equations, whilst still relevent are lacking something with some of the forces pulling on us now, that they could never have imagined – do we actually need people to do things at all and if so, what exactly and why? A modern economy might work better without anyone at all – the only possible requirement is for customers in other countries to export to.

    In principle we could set-up a virtual Wales in the future, totally independent, but of no fixed abode, creating wealth and exporting i bedwar ban y byd.

  6. “the British state is reactionary and neo-imperialist, intervening militarily in states such as Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq” what’s to argue with about that?

    Once Wales secures independence from this reactionary british state a debate will unfold about the kind of wales we want to see, and political formations from the right, left and center will emerge offering alternative visions of Wales. Of course ultimately it will be up to the people of wales to decide what kind of country an independent Wales will be. As a socialist i’d like to see a Wales where equality and the pursuit of social justice are valued, a republic where we are no longer the ‘subjects’ of the grotesque House of Windsor.

  7. kim erswell

    Which model – Cuba, Cambodia, Angolo, Mozambique, Albania, Somalia, Russia, East Germany; Vietnam, North Korea, Venuezuela…Romania, Poland, Congo, etc, etc….?

    • I’ll pick Somalia thanks

      • I think Piracy is their preferred model – could work here as well?

        • Well, Ceredigion farmers had a nice sideline in highway robbery in the 16th century, and Glyndwr fine tuned the art of political kidnap for ransom, (cuts down on the tax burden, don’t you know?) so perhaps piracy isn’t such a bad idea after all!

          I am, of course, saying this tongue very firmly in cheek, and neither of those is ethical, but having said that, hardly any less ethical than capitalism, based on extortion and theft as it is.

          Ultimately I think we need to be thinking in terms of a political and economic system that is divested of the power to oppress. It’s called anarcho-syndicalism where the workers, (I mean the real workers, and not some ‘vanguard party’ that has usurped the workers) and citizens take over the economy and society and run it for the benefit of all. Pie in the sky? Think of what happened in the immediate aftermath of the Grenfell Tower disaster, and read between the lines of the news reports from the flood disaster areas in Texas, and you’ll see that in the almost complete impotences and apathy on the part of the state that it is ordinary people who have spontaneously organised themselves to provide the bulk of the initial relief.

          State involvement only obstructs the efficient operations of ordinary people, and causes more chaos and injustice. Witness what is happening now in the case of the relief and compensation of the Grenfell Tower residents, or indeed, closer to home with what happened in the aftermath of the Aberfan disaster. No state, or system run by capitalists, fascists or Marxists will adequately serve the needs of people, only they themselves can do that efficiently and humanely within the framework of a non-hierarchical, non-coercive system based on mutual aid and respect.

  8. Marx – one of the most smeared and misrepresented person on the planet (as shown by the over the top reactions here)……he did not invent Marxism…..he never even had an ideology

    Communism is inherently stateless – therefore it is impossible that “marxism” or “communism” can ever have existed in a statist or nationalist structure

    He said a huge amount of insightful intelligent comments on his time

    Marx believed that the worker should own his workplace and own shares in it. He believed land should be ran by the communities around it………………

    Pol pot/ Stalin etc have nothing to do with it………………I can call myself a proud chinese cat breed….doesnt mean I am a chinese cat breed

    Same with Nazis calling themselves socialists….while they murdered the german socialist and made work unions illegal……Nazis were fascist…….the same way all these fake communist states were nasty vile dictatorships and totalitarian hellholes

  9. Somalia isnt communist… lie…………………its just a bloody mess created by the destruction of its sole industry fishing by massive industrial fishing ships from Europe and the old USSR in the decades past

    • kim erswell

      The Somali Democrat Republic was a Marxist/Leninist party under President Siad Barre. I’m old enough to remember.

  10. Jonathan Edwards

    Piracy used to be a genuine Welsh industry. We had nearly all the stars in the Golden Age: Howell Davies, who taught Barti Ddu. Both from Pembrokeshire. And maybe you could count Harri Morgan, because he was legit – just – or borderline. If you had energy, character, sea-faring skill but no wealth or connections (though Morgan did) you might take to piracy very easily. Bear in mind this was before coal, so we had little else but farming. A linked industry was “wrecking”. Very well established in Carmarthenshire – treacherous sands but also landowners who were in on all the vast profits. It doesn’t take Marxism to sort Wales out. What is needed is an occupation, work, hopefully with enough reward and excitement to motivate young men in particular. (Yes, yes, there were female pirates). Norway could point the way, Vikings remember. The UK under Thatcher outsourced all shipping to the Third World. But not Norway. Excellent with ships and the sea. But so were the Welsh. My grandfather and thousands like him from all round our coast. Wales is the same size as Norway. Imagine where we’d be if we had the Norway attitude to owning ships. We’d be creaming off profit and taxation revenue from modern and advanced ships. And swapping End-of-Reign decay for vitality, confidence and success. Don’t suppose Marxists will go for this. Or the grey E.Germany-like lot who run the Bay either. But the rest of us could……

    • And the British East India Company could be considered pirates and drug dealers, legitimised by the support and sponsorship of the monarchy – starting with Elizabeth and then to become the source of the Wealth of the House of Hanover and their present day heirs and descendents.

      It seems to be a proven way to become wealthy, but you have to be very good or ruthless at it and have a big powerful army to get away with it.

      • Pretty much summed up capitalism there Trailorboy!

        • I guess so and its amazing how many key figures, admirals, majors and generals in the vanguard of the British army are descended from the rogues of the British East India company.

          Not only pirates, but the ongoing source of protection for their original sponsors.

          Well thats one very controversial way of looking at things anyway.

  11. Tame Frontiersman

    Marx’s analysis of the relationship between capital and labour remain valid. What he considered a vice has arguably been successfully turned into a virtue by parties of the right.

    If Marx were writing today he might well say that celebrity culture and consumerism were the opium of society….and property its crack cocaine.

    Chairman Mao posed the question: “Where do ideas come from? Do they drop from the skies? No. Are they innate in the mind? No. They come from social practice”. (which might be paraphrased as language and culture)

    If Wales aspires to be anything other than a geographical term or a worryingly large but not precisely specified measure of lost land, it might do well to seek inspiration from its heritage, take advantage of its geography and build on its traditional respect for learning and embrace and lead technological change. A small county need not think in small ways.

    Its 31.8.17. If not a rhetorical question, why are we discussing Marxist-Leninist-Mao Zedong thought? –. Surly, today we should be discussing the impact and legacy of Diana (the Last!?!) Princess of Wales! Too soon comrades?

  12. Was only a matter of time before Pol Pot showed up in the comments! Happy days!

    In all seriousness, James Connolly is a more relevant example.

  13. Capitalist and Welshnash

    I will sooner sing ‘God Bless the Prince of Wales’, join the Royal Welsh and the Conservatives, than to see a communist English-speaking nation emerge.

    Independence, by all means Ladies and Gentleman, but not a Wales ruled by the proletariat, the rabble and the ‘gwerin’. For the sake of our cultural inheritance, I would fight against that as much as I fight daily for the Welsh Language and the cause of independence.

    After independence, we should keep our traditions, not cast them by the wayside for the sake of sanctimonious drivel.

    A Marxist Wales would be a Wales of one tongue, English, with naught room for Cymraeg nor our proud traditions and our glorious history as a people, as the class struggle would supersede any cultural or linguistic struggle.

    I would gladly pick up a weapon and fight against such a Wales from emerging. As it would be the Welsh Language’s final death blow.

    God Bless the Prince of Wales after independence.

    • “God Bless the Prince of Wales” – lol i thought the obsequious royal sycophant Wynford Vaughan-Thomas had died in 1987.

      “Independence, by all means Ladies and Gentleman, but not a Wales ruled by the proletariat, the rabble and the ‘gwerin”. Well i guess after posting something as offensive and reactionary as that we don’t need to ask which of the two protagonists in this landmark tv show about welsh history you were rooting for

      I’m afraid the bad news for people with such naked class prejudices as yourself is that there’ll be something called universal suffrage in an independent Wales and the working class ‘rabble’ you speak of will have a large say in the political shape of any governments we elect. So you might want to start looking for a weapons supplier 🙂

      • Capitalist and Welshnash

        The only way we will move the Welsh Nationalist movement towards the centre is by some of us being more conservative.

      • CambroUiDunlainge

        Gwynfor Evans supported Welsh Monarchism. A Windsor… or a Baron Dynevor Talbot/Rice. The point hes making is something that mirror’s modern day Ireland is not acceptable. Even though Ireland broke away from Britain it’s not like there’s been a flourish of Gaelic culture and language is there? I mean a complete rejection of British language and culture does happen – as it did with Malaysia… but they’re trying to turn it back. Anyway yeah… an independent Wales to protect language, culture and heritage… not one that becomes independent to abandons it anyway. Welsh nationalism and the cause for Independence has always been to protect our identity from cultural Imperialism (which includes globalisation) not to simply make some Utopian English speaking Republic.

        I’m not sure what he said was about “class prejudices” at all but accompanying ideologies with certain political avenues. Welsh identity before all else and above all else.

        • Capitalist and Welshnash

          Yes Cambro. Our identity and culture is No. 1.

          About class prejudices, I was merely being reactionary for the sake of being contrary and offering a mirror to those who say, ‘let’s round up all the business owners, gentryand affluent people’ and get rid of them.


        • With regards to the Irish language CambroUiDunlainge i would remind you that the irish constitution – celebrating its 80th anniversary this December – states that Irish Gaelic is the official language of the Irish republic, and Sinn Fein are to be applauded for insisting on the creation of an irish language act in the north of ireland
          While i’m not aware of anyone here wanting to ‘abandon wales language, culture and heritage’ – we all want independence for wales so we can ensure nothing of the kind occurs.

          Regarding the establishment of a Welsh Republic i must say it is difficult to fathom why anyone in favour of an independent Wales would seemingly still want to bow and scrape to Mrs Windsor or one of her offspring. The Irish conducted a long struggle with the British state in order to create their independent republic – we in wales should aim for the creation of nothing less.

          • CambroUiDunlainge

            All very good to regurgitate all that after a quick Google I’m sure. Yes Gaelic is the official language of Ireland. What you failed to grasp from my statement was that since Independence, regardless of it being the state language the total speakers sits around 17% of the population (including NI) which is a smaller percentage of native speakers than there are Welsh speakers in Wales (which sits around 22%?). This is after… as you are so keen to point out… 80 years since the creation of the Irish constitution.

            Now Plaid, like the SNP consider themselves Civic Nationalists – which is a form of nationalism less focused on language and culture. Now this in the extreme would see an independent Wales become like Ireland i mentioned above – which is counter, even a betrayal of the Welsh nationalist movement. That what Capitalist and Welshnash is fearful of – so really hes saying he’d fight any cause which threatens our identity…

            “Welsh Republic”. The SNP wish to keep the Windsors. I also specified the Rice family as another of Gwynfor’s examples (although both Dinefwr and Aberffraw still exist in the modern day). I personally do not support keeping the monarchy. I do however support having a position which represents our identity which binds our nation together above untrustworthy politicians.

            • “All very good to regurgitate all that after a quick Google I’m sure” very droll CambroUiDunlainge but i think our exchanges elsewhere on this website show i’ve no need to resort to employing the services of search engines on matters pertaining to Ireland. Yes the SNP did go into the 2014 referendum saying they would keep Elizabeth Windsor as their head of state – and a lot of good it did them! As despite this attempt to assuage royalist sentiment in scotland the indy campaign was still subject to the most viscous black propaganda operation waged by the british state and its mouthpieces in living memory (and supporters of indy in Wales like ourselves would do well to learn from the experience of that referendum).

  14. Marx remains one of the best ways to understand the modern world, politically and in terms of economic power. In many ways he’s more relevant now than ever. As a tool for understanding how money works, and how work and politics and class changed in the 19th C, and how the 19th C is the century we’re still basically saddled with, you can’t beat him. Anyone who lumps him in with Stalin et al hasn’t read him, is thick or dishonest or all three.
    But the main thing is this: let’s get our own country and then work out how and according to what system, if any, to govern it.

    • kim erswell

      I thought you were serious for a minute…Very funny! I’m all three, lol.

    • People lump Marx with Marxists, but they are two different things. I guess you could use the analogy of Christ and Christians – very few Christians would measure up to Christ’s philosophies or practices and daily distort and disrespect his teachings. It may be an apocryphal story, but it is said that Marx, upon hearing Marxists discussing policies is reputed to have uttered, ‘Thank god I’m not a Marxist!’.

      I’m neither a Christian, or a Marxist, but I see the sense in both, the compassion in the former and the spot on analysis in the latter.

      Neither figure can be held responsible for the actions of their followers, but Marx went wrong in suggesting that a dictatorship of the proletariat led by a vanguard party for a transitionary period was required. All that does is creates a ruling class that takes over where the previous one left off, and far from ‘withering away’ consolidates itself, and we end up with the Stalins and Kim Jong Uns of this world. Better to do away with ruling elites right from the word go, and forgo any kind of dictatorship, even that of the proletariat.

      • Perhaps Christianity itself was a movement created to mobilise peoples into a common cause, to resist agressors during the demise of the Roman Empire? .

        I think Iolo (mad ned) had a few ideas on that front, but it could have been the opioids that gave him such ideas.

  15. Anarchist and Welsh Nash

    Good points there sibrydion mawr

    We’re on the same wavelength on this one!

    As somebody once said” milllions of people are anarchists-they just don’t know it”!

    It’s very telling that marxists hated anarchist thinkers even more than capitalists: because they rightly stood against the glorification of power and authority which has been a hallmark of all communist/socialist societies.

    Anarchists seek power to give power away to ordinary pepple in their communities not to accumulate it at the top.

    The name itself perhaps needs a revamp because of popular perception but the underlying philosophy of mutual aid, co-operation and elimination of hierarchy is so, so WELSH.

    This is how we are naturally are with each other in our communities- i put this down to the levelling influence of Welsh over the centuries, our spiritual sensibilities and our political traditions.

    What we need to do is to build a political and economic system in Wales which truly reflects these innate Welsh traits.

    Do away with this crazy Cardiff centric govermental approach and devolve power down to different areas and communities. Build a truly participative welsh democracy where everyone has a stake.

    Watch Wales soar when that happens.

  16. I rather thought that the point of anarchism was for ordinary people to seize power themselves, and not rely on some group to seize power and then give it away. That was one of the fundamental flaws of Marxism in that it sought to monopolise power and then allowing it’s power to wither. Once power is in one’s hands, it’s rather tempting to too many of us to retain it. If anyone is doubtful about Marxism and where it leads, I suggest reading Animal Farm.

    I’m not sure I share your idealistic perception about Wales and the Welsh people, (much as I’d like to). We are in no way exceptional, except perhaps in being Welsh. We are people, and as such, all human life is here. And surely, a reading of the comments on this blog should point out that there are many differing and conflicting opinions and standpoints, all of which come from a broadly Welsh ‘nationalist’ perspective. But I also think that we are as anarchist as anyone else, and if in the past some of the institutions set up in Wales had some of the qualities of anarchism, it’s because, much like the spontaneous response in the direct aftermath of the Grenfell Tower disaster, there was nothing there serving those functions. That’s where the viewpoint that most people are anarchists starts to have traction.

    If anarchism, or genuine autonomy are ever to get any traction, then perhaps we should hijack one of capitalism’s slogans and ‘Just Do It!’

    Not sure the name needs a revamp really, as it’s no accident that anarchists are presented in the way they are. As a threat to all political systems, they are going to be presented in negative ways. One only has to read ‘Homage to Catalonia’ to learn how the anarchist interests were portrayed by the Marxist press in the UK at the time, and the Marxists were supposed to be allies. Perhaps instead of changing the name, calling it anything should be avoided. or maybe coming up with some innocuous name that no-one could object to? But, no matter what name was used, those whose interests were threatened, i.e. the capitalists and the Marxists etc, would still undermine and pervert the meaning of it’s name. However, it is possible to write whole books about anarchism without mentioning the scary A word once, as any astute reader of Summerhill: A radical approach to child rearing would realise. I strongly suggest that people read it, though capitalists should go for a medical check up as I can’t guarantee that they won’t have a heart attack when they consider the likely outcome of such radical methods – the aim is to turn out self-regulating human beings, which is why capitalists have always been somewhat resistant to proper education for the masses. Workers who can think and act in their own best interests are a pretty scary prospect.

    ‘Summerhill: A radical approach to child rearing’ isn’t that easy to find in print these days, but fortunately, thanks to they existence of the world wide web and the Internet Archive, a copy can be downloaded here:

  17. Two reasons for Welsh independence…’Davis’ and ‘Fox’…

  18. Thomas Brotherston

    Rampant confusion here.
    Q. Is a Welsh capitalist employer better for Welsh workers than an English one
    Q. Is an independent wales a classless concept.
    This should be enough to be going on with.

  19. “Marxists view national movements for independence as a function; a means to an end rather than an end in itself.” So ‘Nationalists’ are ti be used as tools to help achieve International Marxists dreams? Nightmare

Leave a Reply