Galway SWP condemn Kevin Higgins poem

by don't support the war Thu Aug 07, 2008 12:05

Be that as it may, the Galway Socialist Workers handed him the publicity coup by writing that somewhat unintelligent letter. And anyway the SWP have been extensively criticised on the left for their weasel words regarding Darfur. Higgins simply put it into a poem, and quite an effective poem at that.

by Merely a duplicate post Tue Aug 05, 2008 13:50

This is merely a self-promoting Zhdanov Higgins post encouraging sales of a book. As such it is simply commercial. I refer interested readers to The Irish Times review of the ZH first collection published a couple of years ago.

by Andrei Zhdanov Mon Aug 04, 2008 15:28

Tomeile makes some decent points in his latest comment above. I don't think Higgins could possibly object to anyone using irony. But to have 'The Party' condemn him - be it the poem or his view on Darfur - was singularly dumb. The letter should have been signed by some of their members who are known as local activists; that way it would have look way less weird to the average reader of The Galway Advertiser. The suspicion is that they wanted to make the 'mastubation' joke to try and compete with Higgins's usually ironic way of writing - big mistake - but didn't have the guts to put their names to that.

by tomeile Mon Aug 04, 2008 14:39

Andrei is mixing things up –in fairness it’s something easy to do with quotation marks within quotation marks . The SWP doesn’t in fact say that Higgins is a bad poet . It’s not the word poet that is in the quotation marks in the Galway Adverizer ,but the word acclaimed. As Andrei noted himself , Galway SWP wrote :

‘We are sorry that an “acclaimed” Galway poet would use a quote out of context.’

The SWP is being ironic ,but is irony not allowed in political discourse ; should only poets be allowed the use of it? Andrei is of course correct in saying that you can’t call somebody a bad poet just because you don’t agree with the sentiments expressed in his or her work .

by Andrei Zhdanov Mon Aug 04, 2008 00:34

section deleted by editors - speculating on contributors' identity.

Tomeile raises some significant points:
"Maybe it’s not coming from Higgins himself ,but his defenders on this thread seem to be giving the impression that the SWP is somehow supporting the suppression of poetry . Aibhe Darcy writes for instance : “It is not Kevin Higgins you have a problem with, in other words, but poetry itself.”. "

One issue is the way that, the minute Higgins openly challenges the SWP line on an issue he went from being a poet they were happy to publish in their paper to being 'an "acclaimed" poet'. Their ironic use of quotation marks around the word acclaimed in their Galway Advertiser letter is typical of the sort of stuff which Fred Johnston has regularly littered the letters page of the local Galway press with. A writer doesn't agree with you, or isn't active in politics in the way you think they should be, so they suddenly become a bad writer, not because they're actually a bad writer, but because they disagree with you. The SWP letter tried to dismiss the argument about Darfur by pretending that Higgins is a bad poet. And the end of their letter, the masturbation bit, was the sort of crudity which the Stalinists practiced all the time in their criticism of dissident artists. The fact that they did not have the balls to sign the letter as individuals but as "Galway Socialist Workers Party" gave the whole things a seriously dodgy ring also.

George Orwell said something which is applicable here: "The Catholic and the Communist are alike in assuming that an opponent cannot be both honest and intelligent. Each of them tacitly claims that 'the truth' has already been revealed, and that the heretic, if he is not simply a fool, is secetly aware of 'the truth' and merely resists it out of selfish motives."

On Tomeile's other related point:
"Andrei Zhdanov was as you must be aware a Stalinist proponent of socialist realism and an advocate of severe state censorship in the Soviet Union ."

Yes. But, as outlined, it's relevant here. A strain in Higgins's poetry - or in the most recent book anyway- is his, at times slightly over the top, hostility to Stalinism. In his airshow protest poem he writes about the bloke who "Every chance he gets [ticks him off or words to that effect] for bearing false witness against East Germany". And in this poem here 'Page from the diary of an officially approved person' - source Nthposition.com or the book - he talks about "the twilight politburo" of an Irish anti-poverty careerist's mind.

Page from the diary of an officially approved person

By day, your new blonde hair
and state-sponsored smile are twin planks
in the Government’s anti-poverty strategy,
as you put on your enthusiasm and treat
another seminar
to an orgy of flip-charts; then play
Mayors and Ministers off
against each other
over the much anticipated beef stroganoff.
No-one noticing the names being underlined in red
in the twilight Politburo of your mind.

By night, you sit alone in a mansion called Equality,
and listen to the moans,
from some far basement, of those
whose nervous hands questioned
this expense account,
that clerk’s timely suicide; openly defied
whole conference-loads of otherwise
unanimous applause.

The SWP have every right to take Higgins to task. But when they try to make out that he's a bad poet, simply because he disagrees with them, or when their supporters claim he is just another "an ex-leftie in search of a grant", it leaves them open to comparision with some pretty bad people.

by tomeile Sun Aug 03, 2008 17:07

Your third question above clearly implies that you think that the SWP wants to censor Higgins when there is no evidence to suggest that that is the case. Maybe it’s not coming from Higgins himself ,but his defenders on this thread seem to be giving the impression that the SWP is somehow supporting the suppression of poetry . Aibhe Darcy writes for instance : “It is not Kevin Higgins you have a problem with, in other words, but poetry itself.”. The title of this article “Galway SWP condemn Kevin Higgins poem" and the tenor of your posts give the impression that the SWP are opposed to the poem rather than to the political sentiments expressed in it.

Andrei Zhdanov was as you must be aware a Stalinist proponent of socialist realism and an advocate of severe state censorship in the Soviet Union . By choosing to call yourself by that name you were clearly raising the issue of censorship and suggesting that the SWP’s criticism of Higgins was an act of censorship and attack on his right to publish poetry. In other words you were trying to stifle the SWP ‘s criticism of Higgins position on Darfur .

by About Darfur Sun Aug 03, 2008 01:07

“In today's ethically topsy-turvy world, many self-proclaimed ‘anti-racists' seem quite happy to ignore the role of fundament ali st Islam in the genocide in the Darfur region of Sudan, where racist Arab Islamists are massacring the black African population.”
http://www.petertatchell.net/multiculturalism/democrati...8.htm

by FR Sat Aug 02, 2008 17:18

"A man who has never espoused the Left in Galway,never attended meetings or demos" Mandrake.

What Mandrake says here is blatantly untrue. I was on the first ever (tiny) demo in Galway against the Afghanistan war in 2001, and Kevin Higgins was there and he spoke. I don't agree with some of what Higgins said in the recent Galway Advertiser interview. But he is entitled to his point of view and Mandrake (or should I say Fred Johnston) is a liar.

And whatever his current political state of mind, Higgins poem 'A Brief History of Those Who Made Their Point Politely' is one of the best revolutionary poems written in decades.

http://www.laurahird.com/showcase/kevinhiggins.html

by Andrei Zhdanov Sat Aug 02, 2008 16:36

"Kevin Higgins recently had this said of him, in Justin Quinn’s The Cambridge Introduction to Modern Irish Poetry, 1800-2000, "Chapter 12, The disappearance of Ireland": Kevin Higgins (b. 1967) has demonstrated a good satirical savagery when facing the new Ireland. His first collection, The Boy with No Face (2005), contains many poems in conventional lyrical modes (in which he is weaker) and others with a social critique as lithe and imaginative as that of the con-merchants who run the show. He has perhaps acquired much of his sharpness by taking part in poetry slams. ... A satire which eschews moderation and openly admits its own savagery can only succeed." source http://www.salmonpoetry.com

Q. for tomeile: In what way is Higgins trying censor the SWP's right to criticise his position on Darfur?

Q. for general feedback: do Higgins's criticisms of the Galway left make him a bad poet?

Q. also for general feedback: if as Higgins says in his Galway Advertiser interview, the "comrades..ever were to stumble into power", would a poet such as Higgins be allowed to continue freely publishing his books, or would his poetry be banned?

Also, does anyone have access to the mentioned Irish Times review? Would like to post it.

by Steve Sat Aug 02, 2008 16:09

or one of your piles will pop. The blame here for the publicity Kevin Higgins is getting around this lies squarely with Galway Socialist Workers party. They wrote that moronic letter. Or is 'Mandrake' - and I think every reader of letters pages worldwide knows who he is - suggesting that Higgins also penned the SWP letter attacking himself? Higgins clearly baited the SWP in that interview in the Galway Advertiser, yes. But they turned out to be every bit as stupid as he says they are. To any neutral observer his statement about the Galway left being "dominated by bullies" will appear to have been vindicated.

And all the stuff about him 'never' having been on the left, 'never' having been on a demo, when he was a member of Militant all those years. You people are silly.

by tomeile Sat Aug 02, 2008 15:15

It seems to be more a case of Higgins trying to suppress the right of the SWP to oppose his political position on Darfur. The only thing I find strange is that the Irish Times may have been critical of his poetry at some point . Usually the Times would try to promote these sort of ex- leftist-out- looking- for-a- grant types . Perhaps the review came out at a time when Higgins was still in his left chrysalis.
Good to see the anti-war left is still on the ball in Galway btw.

by Steve Fri Aug 01, 2008 21:35

In yesterday's Irish Independent Ian O'Doherty stuck his size nines into Galway SWP over their Darfur stance. He quotes from their Galway Advertiser letter about the Kevin Higgins poem. Doherty's intervention might actually help Galway SWP out of the corner they're in on this one though, him being a bit of a media hate figure for lefties generally?

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/ian-odoher....html
"We know the West has been responsible for numerous atrocities against the Developing World and we should all be prepared to issue a collective and heart-felt apology for these crimes, such as slavery, colonialism... and foisting Bob Geldof onto them. Oh yeah, and America is responsible for developing Aids.

That's the considered view of Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who is hosting a conference of non-aligned nations in Tehran. Among other things, he claims that America's days are numbered, the West is about to collapse, America should be kicked out of the UN and the International Criminal Court is a disgrace for indicting Sudanese leader Omar al-Bashir for the trifling matter of genocide.

That, he said, was another example of: "The rich and powerful countries continuing to exercise an inordinate influence in determining the nature and direction of international relations."

So, the Yanks introduced Aids to Africa, the UN is to blame "for allowing the problem of Palestine" and anyone who condemns the genocide in Sudan is Islamophobic.

Interestingly, on that last point, Ahmadinejad is on the same page as the Galway Branch of the Socialist Workers party, who recently denounced criticism of Sudan, saying it merely perpetuates: "The Islamophobic view of Arabs as violent aggressors and the portrayal of Africans as victims."

If you want to hear more of the Galway SWP's views, they meet every Wednesday night -- in a phone box on Shop Street."

by Andrei Zhdanov Fri Aug 01, 2008 15:38

This section of the Galway SWP letter the newspaper refers exclusively to the quote Higgins uses in his poem.

"Having read the article in the Galway Advertiser about Kevin Higgins, we wish to address his quote from “Socialist Worker” concerning Darfur. We are sorry that an “acclaimed” Galway poet would use a quote out of context.

The Darfur war was being depicted as genocidal “Arabs” slaughtering “black Africans” –this bore little relationship to facts. However, the depiction fitted the Islamophobic view of Arabs as violent aggressors and the portrayal of Africans as “ever the victims”.

It was problematic to label the conflict “genocide” in as much as such a term did not convey the complexity of tensions, political overspills, civil war, shifting alliances

Creating ‘Arab’ versus ‘African’ was bogus, but powerful - in whose interests? We are alarmed that Higgins would disingenuously use a quote - for his own interests." http://www.galwayadvertiser.ie/content/index.php?aid=11358

by tomeile Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:34

Galway SWP was criticising an interview the poet gave to the Galway Advertiser . At no time did they call for the censoring of either the poem or of Higgins views - which were presumably expressed in prose in the interview .
But were the SWP to be criticising the political content of the poem it would be fully entitled to do so. If Higgins chooses to use poetry to make a political point , that shouldn't put his viewpoint beyond political criticism , surely . Think of what we'd end up with - every political huckster going around talking in iambic pentameter or whatever and getting away with it..

by confused Fri Aug 01, 2008 12:26

I'm quite confused by this thread because I've read all the links and cannot see anywhere that Galway SWP condemns a poem. Their letter was about what Higgins said in an interview, not about his poetry. So, why the heading on the whole thread?

by doggy Thu Jul 31, 2008 12:49

My Shameful Tendency

Tis two thous and eight and I know everything.
Neo Con’s are people who always end up asking
Christopher Hitchens to sing them another song.
I'd rather be putting off radical ideas
poisoning young minds, but
have to purge my past first. Long ago,
struggle meant freedom; now
it's the narrative of the narcissist
Instead of socialism, I find socialites.
While others dream of organising, educating,
and educating; I promise a hefty donation to Gorta
the minute I become Lauriat. In all of this
there is usually a dinner jacket involved. I tell
cousin Walter and his lovely new wife, Elizabeth,
to put their aspirations in their underpants
and smoke them; watch
my life become a play:
I’m alright Jack.

Ode-ous

How’s my spelling?
1800-5050-666-111

by Andrei Zhdanov Wed Jul 30, 2008 19:57

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerel

by rollo Wed Jul 30, 2008 17:02

Long live Ireland's gallant standing army of ten thousand doggerel poets.

by Andrei Zhdanov Wed Jul 30, 2008 15:08

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ULUCGo9XZag&feature=related

by Andrei Zhdanov Wed Jul 30, 2008 15:03

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gE-1H-ebNWQ&feature=related

by Ode ous Wed Jul 30, 2008 14:56

The blathering bard

Youthful compassion
Stole your heart
Far off struggles
That you were part

College campaigns
Posed little trouble
But the sans collettes
Were outside your bubble

Studied the quotes
Learned them by rote
And still the unwashed
Didn’t bother to vote

Question everything!
Karl gave you the tools
An educated man
Amongst fools

At the end of study
Life choices beckoned
With a senate to elect
Decisions to be reckoned

A wordsmith to be
Trade with the rest
Classy company
Simply the best!

System change
Is all very well
But can get in the way
Of the book to sell

Now more mature
Laugh at your past
Justifying in rhyme
Acceptable at last

Still there’s a nagging
A sense of unease
Conscious preventing
To do as you please

The answer is clear
Why wasn’t it seen?
Simply turn away
From what had been

And warn of the folly
To each and to all
Of the path taken
Of the socialist call

Instead write ditties
To delight and amuse
While the tigers of Erin
Get rich and abuse

The Times is excited
An artist indeed
Waxing lyrical
While workers bleed

Ode-ous

by IshtarCelt Wed Jul 30, 2008 02:22

I smell somthing here...quite rotten...

Is freedom of speech not part of socialism?
Are we only allowed express certain opinions and not others?
Are we only free to say what you tell us to?
Or what you agree with?
is disillusionment not allowed expression?
or any form of questioning?

I can smell it alright....

And I think this issue has got a place on indymedia - for is indymedia not here to give us the info that is CENSORED elsewhere?

This is the real issue - CENSORSHIP

a rotten stench

Does a poet or author always express only their own opinions and never give voice to opposing arguements?
Do people ever question previously held beliefs?
It's a process, though - people change, their principles change as they question themselves and the world around them. Surely this is better than parroting
the same line ad infinitum?

Speaking as a Galway resident, there are certain groups where it's true, you can keep re-inventing yourself as you go along, and these groups will believe you - there's generally a lot of smoke and pipe dreams involved - but you can find that anywhere....

It's not always easy when someone who has previously agreed with you seems to do an about-turn, or says something you disagree with, that seems to be a betrayal of the principles you seem to have held in common. I'm a poor person ( in terms of money - on welfare, single parent, no maintenance), yet I have internet access and a computer, which gives me some freedom - this is due in part to socialist principles of welfare and in part to industrial capitalism chruning out so many computers that i can now afford a new one (on HP).

I think these issues are very complex. Should I now be grateful to industrial capitalism for this and other trickled down 'luxury' items I now have? I don't aggree with industrial transnational capitalism at all, Its destroying our planet, our arable soil, our health etc, for the greed of a very few. But; I can count some positive benefits - it's better than 50's Ireland for me and my children! Monthy Python had it right - 'what did the Romans ever do for us; - apart from aqueducts...'etc

Is Higgin's poem a defence of Capitalism, an attack on Galway SWP, an attack on all socialist thought, or something else entirely?

I'm not sure what the man himself says (Higgins), but has anyone here ever heard of 'A modest proposal' by Dean Swift? What an awful man! Killing babies of the poor and feeding them back to their parents to solve their food problems. Really! What a monster!

by Andrei Zdhanov Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:35

There is further comment on this
at
http://angelicish.journalspace.com/?cmd=displaycomments...d=287
&
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2008/07/22/the-socialist-wo...itic/

by another poetry lover Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:35

photos of the Polish poetry evening are at
http://www.galway.net.pl/index.php?option=com_content&t...id=40

by another poetry lover Wed Jul 16, 2008 11:31

...or at least a difference of emphasis. It seems like maybe the Galway SWP attacking Higgins was a solo run which has backfired. The comment from 'poetry lover' seems very different. The thing is, though, that over the past while no-one on the Irish poetry scene has done more than Higgins to promote the diversity and inclusiveness which 'poetry lover' talks about. He organised and MCed the recent reading form Poems from Guantamano Bay at the Amnesty Cafe in Galway. His group organised the evening of Polish poetry at Sheridan's back in the Spring, which drew a huge crowd. The original Galway SWP letter in The Galway Advertiser is a disaster. Even if you disagree with Higgins about Darfur, and agree with the SWP line on it, their letter is indefensible. It'll have done Higgins no harm at all. But it has done big damage to Galway SWP.

Also, why didn't they have the guts - not to mention good sense- to put their names to the letter? A poet being condemned by the party. Now that really does sound like a bad Stalinist dream.

by poetry lover Tue Jul 15, 2008 19:20

We believe that for Art to flourish diversity is a prerequisite. Poetry by its very nature is an international art form and when poets from different cultures meet the art form flourishes. We also believe that society benefits from this cultural interaction.

http://www.swp.ie/news/latest/lovepoetryhateracism2008.html

by Ailbhe Darcy Tue Jul 15, 2008 17:05

"...not known for his presence either in Galway street demos or in the columns of local papers giving forth on things political."

This dismissal suggests that you do not consider poetry ever to be a legitimate part of the public discourse - only newspapers and demos 'count'. It is not Kevin Higgins you have a problem with, in other words, but poetry itself.

by KImberly Jacobs Mon Jul 14, 2008 12:16

"Judging by Higgins interview he has embraced capitalism", says anon.

But rejecting what passes for "the left" doesn't make you a supporter of the right. Especially when "the left" is making roundabout excuses for what's happening in Darfur. Especially when "the left" defends the crackdown on dissent brought in by Lenin and Trotsky, and logically, would do the same thing if it got into power. Especially when "the left" can't help jumping down the throats of anyone who has the temerity to disagree with them.

If terms like "socialism" and "the left" have anything to do with freedom - and I happen to think they do - then Higgins is more left-wing than any of this crowd lining up to slag him. That seems to me a good reason to give him a glowing review. But then, maybe the good review is (shock horror!) down to the poetry being good? Zhdanov is alive and well, by the looks of it.

by Historian Mon Jul 14, 2008 09:38

Should read@

"It WASN'T Zhdanov ...."

by Historian Mon Jul 14, 2008 09:36

It was actually Zhdanov who initially banned the non party press in the USSR. It was Lenin and Trotsky. Plus ca change you might say. And indeed the 'response' from the SWP, replete with vulgarisms, is quite reminisicent of the sort of stuff the Bolsheviks used to denigrate their opponents after 1917. Before murdering them of course. Which is possibly Higgin's point.

by Andrei Zhdanov Mon Jul 14, 2008 02:02

Am not supporting Higgins. Just think this is an intriguing politico-cultural clash. Higgins is certainly no Stalinist as the article posted here shows. Quite the polar opposite
http://www.nthposition.com/stasiland.php

One of his issues with the Anti-Airshow people seems precisely to be presence of at least one Stalinist among them.

See the poem posted her and below
http://www.nthposition.com/stageleftbookshop.php

The annual air show protest

U.S. Air Force Thunderbirds are God
taking pneumatic drills to the sky.
The cat covers his ears and retires
to the back of the wardrobe.
Elsewhere, a demo gives old friends
somewhere to put their anger.
The man who, every chance he gets,
ticks you off for bearing false witness
against East Germany, hands out red balloons.
His moustache stops to congratulate itself.
His heartbeat hammers: Long Live Stalin!
Long Live Stalin! A guy with purple hair
offers Food Not Bombs to an elderly
white woman with dreadlocks.

You uproot weeds, tell yourself
if their dream republic got born,
the cat wouldn't be crouching
in the dark, but cold between slices
of questionable brown-bread
- all you'd have to eat - know
you're more likely to go
into the night on a unicycle
screaming: Free Paris Hilton!
Free Paris Hilton! than accept
another red balloon from them.

by Mise le Meas Mon Jul 14, 2008 01:40

By the way, what a dreadfully unfortunate pseudonym your correspondent above has used! Zhdanov, as I remember, a great and close friend of Stalin. set up the Union of Soviet Writers, banned progressive magazines and journals and instituted 'Zhdanovism,' the policy of clearing out any writer who didn't toe the Party line. I'm not sure I'd like this guy to be supporting ME! It would mean I was a Party hack and a rabid conservative!!!

by Mise le Meas Sun Jul 13, 2008 20:02

Embracing capitalism and the Right while wearing a right-on Lefty poet's mantle to get street cred is an old trick and he's not the only one doing it. In Galway, I believe, you can make yourself up as you go along and even fool people who should know better. All I know is that the Left who demonstrate and take their beliefs to the street for Guantanamo, Shannon, and Iraq and Palestine are the real thing and we should be proud of them. Now be sensible and stop giving this character space!

by anon Sun Jul 13, 2008 19:25

But how come Higgins recent book - slammed by the SWP - got such a glowing review in issue 32 of Red Banner by one Joe Conroy? Judging by Higgins interview he has embraced capitalism while Conroy argues that all socialists should welcome this collection. What up?

by Jolly Red Giant - Socialist Party Fri Jul 11, 2008 22:33

I am not going to get into the political arguments on this issue -

However, the SWP letter could at best be described as childish and at worse offensive.

As for Higgins - there are worse things than a cynical ex-Marxist.

by strophe Fri Jul 11, 2008 16:11

clip of Higgins reading from the offending poem

by Andrei Zdhanov Fri Jul 11, 2008 14:53

on
http://www.laurahird.com/showcase/kevinhiggins.html

you'll find from his first book
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THOSE WHO MADE THEIR POINT POLITELY AND THEN WENT HOME

On this day of tear-gas in Seoul
and windows broken at Dickins & Jones,
I can’t help wondering why a history
of those, who made their point politely
and then went home, has never been written.

Those who, in the heat of the moment,
never dislodged a policeman’s helmet,
never blocked the traffic or held the country to ransom.
Someone should ask them: “Was it all worth it?”

All those proud men and women, who never
had the National Guard sent in against them;
who left everything exactly as they found it,
without adding as much as a scratch to the paintwork;
who no-one bothered asking: “Are you or have you ever been?”
because we all knew damn well they never ever were.

&
BLACKHOLE

This is the place where an old man with a twisted neck
falters on his way down a long pathway
to his privatised death in some musty, dark corner of a room.

This is the place where young men come out
into the shadows behind cemetery walls
to paint swastikas on headstones
and play football with skulls.

This is the place where council estates come complete
with built in big dogs and gunshots,
where a dull sun bakes the furnace air
as tower-block windows give that careless look
that only tranquillised eyes can throw,
where concrete thrusts pick the nose of the sky
as rubbish blows on the slow route to the paper heart of it all,
where the empty hours of the afternoon just get longer and longer,
where a drunk spunks out poison about Pakis and seven-year-olds
run junkie messages in Camelot House for carpet-knifed men
who carve reminders on the door,
where a wheel-chaired man belts the floor with his paranoid stick
and someone screams at a bare-knuckled wall
after the key-meter ran out,
where schizophrenics sit in timeless cafes
as matted hair women join pointless queues,
where a crack in the door shooter points up a bailiff nostril
as pools of liquid are in corners of the lift,
where police murders fall down stairs of convenience
and onto page nineteen,
where concealed Stanley-knives lurk
around scuttling cash-point machines
as lethal impressions hang
around the bus-shelter in the distance,
where asylum eyes poke out into the frantic spectre of the dusk
as endless discussions chase their tales
out through bizarre suicidal windows,
down to earth, where the dawn shines an angry light
into the bald face of the morning as nameless
blood stains another pavement,
where you could write slogans in the grime on the billboards
but no-one knows what to say now,
where arteries are clogged in North Circular bottlenecks
as ghettoblasters beat obscenities into the heads of grey old women,
where no-one asks the question
why do you write depressing poetry?

Here there are no nature walks,
no buttercups nor wild roses flourish.
No ripe autumn roads of blackberry brambles
bouncing along with a spring in their step.
Only poisoned grass by the railway.
Only grey-black slush dissolving the memory
of the last pure flake of snow.

This is the place where the city looks out through exhausted eyes,
where sweaty streets are all dressed up
in tasteless rectangular grey,
where day dreams flicker in café tea mugs
as cheapskate hotels rent out rooms by the hour.

This is the place,
just another sore in the mouth of the metropolis
where hope has been given an execution cigarette,
where it’s very much a case of c’est la vie
as you straggle into the abyss of the echoing streets
at an insane hour after talking it all through.
This is the place from where no light escapes.

and on
http://www.nthposition.com/summerinterludepage.php
you'll find one from 'Time Gentlemen, Please'

Page from the diary of an officially approved person
by Kevin Higgins

By day, your new blonde hair
and state-sponsored smile are twin planks
in the Government’s anti-poverty strategy,
as you put on your enthusiasm and treat
another seminar
to an orgy of flip-charts; then play
Mayors and Ministers off
against each other
over the much anticipated beef stroganoff.

No-one noticing the names being underlined in red
in the twilight Politburo of your mind.
By night, you sit alone in a mansion called Equality,
and listen to the moans,
from some far basement, of those
whose nervous hands questioned
this expense account,
that clerk’s timely suicide; openly defied
whole conference-loads of otherwise
unanimous applause.

Hardly backs up what Streetwise says.

by Andrei Zhdanov Fri Jul 11, 2008 14:31

also read this
http://invereskstreet.blogspot.com/2008/06/my-militant-....html

and this
http://www.salmonpoetry.com/theboy.html#redbanner

by StreetWise Fri Jul 11, 2008 14:28

The individual referred to, Mr higgins, is not known for his presence either in Galway street demos or in the columns of local papers giving forth on things political. His attacks upon the active and genuine Left in Galway were mischievous, coming from someone who treads such a safe and conservative path and backs no causes that risk anything. Attacking the Left is a nod in the direction of respectability; the Left have mroe sense than to be taken in by fellow-travellers. I woud be wary about giving him too much Indy space. His leanings are to the Right and what passes for social approval in Galway. Only the very naive and inexperienced would be fooled.

by non-Leninist Marxist Fri Jul 11, 2008 14:27

I've gone through those threads recommended by D_D and it's just the usual defence of Leninism, i.e. don't judge Lenin by today's organisations - Lenin and the Bolsheviks were much better, less rigid and more open than that! It's a poor defence when one looks at what the Bolsheviks actually did from 1917 onwards. Nullification of the soviets, re-introduction of authoritarian gorvernmental structures, crushing of the Workers Opposition, negative interference in Germany, Kronstadt, one-party rule....I could go on and on.

Marxists need to be flexible not worshippers of the dead.

by D_D Fri Jul 11, 2008 14:14

Interesting discussions here:

http://www.socialistvoice.ca/?p=302

and here:

http://www.isreview.org/issues/59/feat-lenin.shtml

by ISN'er Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:26

And there is also the 'tradition' of non-Leninist Marxism (represented in Ireland by the Irish Socialist Network) that focuses on the achievement of genuine participatory democracy rather than on the triumph of the 'vanguard party'.

The Trots and Leninists don't own socialism.

by Another Kevin Fri Jul 11, 2008 11:13

II think I am with Kevin Higgins on some of what he says.

1) On the issue of the Trots stumbling into power and what that would entail. He is right, I think. I know a good many Trotskyists and on a personal level they are all fine people and I have much respect for them. But the SWP or the SP in power??? That’s another matter. There are some cold and calculating people amount them and ally that aspect with a generalised 'cadre' mentality in their ranks (in other words “ we know better than you and we know what you want even you don't yourself”) and you can have a lot of trouble - suppression of freedom and dissent etc. History speaks loudly and clearly on this: Leninism has been a disaster for the left.

2) On Darfur Kevin is not wrong there. Genocide can take place even thought there are complex and complicated interests at play on a particular issue - as there are in Darfur, What's the issue about denying that genocide takes place there: is this connected to some general unease the Leninist left have with the notion of genocide.

3) As for the Galway left and its focus well I can't really comment as I don't know enough about the matter and am not from there. However I think Kevin is not correct in saying that society now (capitalist Ireland) is far preferable than what a socialist society could be like. In his defence I presume he is speaking about freedoms and rights here and has the model of Trotskyism in mind. There are two points to make really. Firstly, freedom in this society is very much constrained by economic well being or class position. For many people in this society they've have little rights due to their economic exploitation – so it depends on who you are talking about. The rich have lots of rights and the rest of us a lot less. Secondly, however, I think Kevin is making a mistake in the general sense in that he seems not mention, or consider, that there is a valid and vibrant tradition on the left that links Freedom and revolution – this is the tradition of anarchist ideas. We can't have socialism without freedom and nor really can we have freedom without socialism. Bakunin said that a long time ago and it’s valid now as it was then – maybe more so.

Overall though I value Kevin H’s poetry and the left should hold him dear. It’s great to see a writer not afraid to tackle the old bogies.