Obituary: Arthur Miller - death of a legend

In Green and Red - the lives of Frank Ryan by Adrian Hoar

The Corporation by Mark Achbar & Jennifer Abbot

Selling out? Privatisation in Ireland by Paul Sweeney

On 10 February 2005, Arthur Miller, one of the greatest playwrights of the last century died at the age of 89 after a lifetime of struggle against the political establishment.

Arthur Miller was born in 1915, the son of a prosperous clothing manufacturer in New York. However, the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and the ensuing "Great Depression" hit the family hard with Arthur becoming a low-paid shipping clerk in an automobile warehouse after graduating from high school in order to raise enough money to attend the University of Michigan. He once did an interview for The Times in which he said "Until 1929 I thought things were pretty solid and somebody was in charge, probably a businessman and a realistic, no-nonsense fellow. In 1929 he jumped out of the window. It was bewildering".

After that, Miller would never have any illusions in the capitalist system, his avid reading and his experiences drove him to question the system and moved him politically to the left. Miller moved to New York again at the outbreak of World War II with his first successful play, All My Sons, hitting Broadway in 1947. It dealt with the corruption of an arms manufacturer who knowingly sold defective equipment to the US air force causing many pilots to lose their lives. His big break however came in 1949 when the now classic Death of a Salesman opened on Broadway to critical acclaim.

The play exposes the reality of so-called "American Dream". The protagonist Willy Loman has spent his whole life working hard and trying to get ahead but ends up losing his job. It is at this point, while thinking about his life insurance, he realises that it's "Funny, y'know? After all the highways, and the trains, and the appointments, and the years, you end up worth more dead than alive". Miller defined his aim with this play as being "to set forth what happens when a man does not have a grip on the forces of life." The play went on to win the distinguished Pulitzer Prize.

Despite this, Miller's success was greeted by some with open hostility. 1950s America was a hotbed of reaction, fuelled by fear over the "communist" threat. The US was in the grips of a witch-hunt for "reds under the beds." Hundreds of activists and radicals were pulled off the streets.

The scare however, did not just stop with street activists, but reached into the lives of artists, actors and playwrights who were called before the now infamous House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) led by right-wing Republican Senator Joe McCarthy. Those accused were asked the question, "Are you or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party?" The only way to clear one's name and save one's career was by naming others. If you refused, it would mean almost certain exile from your own industry and possibly even jail. Miller, appalled by this blatant violation of human rights, wrote a damning indictment of it in the form of The Crucible, based upon the worst witch-trials in American history in 1692 in Salem, Massachusetts. People were accused of being witches on the basis of flimsy evidence and the testimonies of children who were being used by religious zealots. If they refused to confess and to name others, they were hung.

On the back of this, Miller was accused of writing plays that were un-American and was hauled before the committee in 1956. Unlike some, including Elia Kazan, the director of several of Miller's plays, he took a principled position even at the risk of his career and refused to name names.

Arthur Miller's name became a household name when he married Marilyn Monroe and was found guilty of contempt of Congress for refusing to name names the HUAC.

He describes his revulsion at the morals of the HUAC when its then chair, right-wing senator Francis Walter, offered to drop the charge if he could persuade Monroe to be photographed shaking his hand. Miller and Monroe both refused.

Almost fifty years later, Miller was still active and condemned the Bush administration's domestic and foreign policy. At a time when so many former left-wing artists and writers have become cynical Miller was an heroic exception. To the end, he fought on against Bush, against the turn towards downsizing and privatisation in the theatre and against the inability of capitalism to solve the world's problems.

His works remain timeless in exposing the reality of life under capitalism, a life of poverty, exploitation and persecution under the iron heel of big business and the political establishment. His work snatched people from their political slumbers and forced them to look critically at the world. But they also remain an inspiration to the new generation of activists and socialists, by constantly highlighting ordinary people's solidarity and hope for a better world and the potential to build a new society.

Of all the political leaders of the post civil war era, Frank Ryan is probably the most controversial and interesting.

His life, or certainly how it has been reported, was one of many contradictions and this has been used by some to write Ryan off as politically confused and more of a loose cannon than a shrewd leader. For this reason, Adrian Hoar's book is to be welcomed as a fresh account of Frank Ryan's life.

From relative obscurity, and at a young age, he emerged as a leading figure in the republican movement and played a leading role in the War of Independence and the ensuing Civil War. To him, the signing of the Treaty was nothing short of treachery. The republic he envisaged was in line with that which James Connolly struggled for - a socialist Ireland that united Catholic and Protestant workers. Although a fervent nationalist and Irish speaker, he consistently opposed those who whipped up sectarianism. Under his editorship, An Phoblacht, the unofficial organ of the old IRA, moved decisively to the left and as Hoar's book reveals, Ryan's political evolution, if somewhat confused, developed in a socialist direction until his death.

The book paints a vivid picture of the type of man Ryan was. A natural leader and a very capable organiser, he was a man motivated by a searing hatred of imperialism and its Irish capitalist counterparts and willing to endure personal suffering to fight against injustice. He was unbending in his ideas and never lost sight of the ultimate goal of a socialist Ireland. He was often referred to as extremely dogmatic by friends and enemies alike. However, he also showed a unique ability to recognise a changed situation and to alter tactics and approach. Ryan recognised the dead end of the tactic of individual terrorism (the armed struggle) and broke with the old conservative leadership of the IRA and along with George Gilmore and Peadar O'Donnell launched the socialist Republican Congress in 1934 that united Catholic and Protestant working class activists.

Whilst the Republican Congress was a short-lived experiment, it was, for a period, successful in attracting an important layer of militant workers and small left groups. Branches sprung up over night and in the North was successful in bridging the sectarian divide. Trade union branches affiliated and at the Bodenstown Wolfe Tone commemoration in 1934 Congress' contingent numbered over 2,000 including workers from the protestant Shankill Road. At the founding conference, it was declared that Republican Congress was a "workers' revolutionary party" and that its goal "was a workers' republic."

The book gives an accurate and lengthy account of Ryan's involvement in the Spanish Civil War that broke out in 1936 with the Fascist uprising in Morocco. Spain was the battlefield for the contending ideologies of the 1930s where the Spanish working class took up arms against the fascist menace. The Catholic Church in Ireland gave wholehearted support to Franco's fascist legions backed up by Hitler and Mussolini, while the so-called democracies of France and Britain turned their back on the Spanish people. To them, a fascist Spain was a small price to pay to stop a socialist Spain. For Ryan and the small band of men he mobilised, this was a must win battle.

Despite their small numbers the Irish section of the International Brigade played a very active role in Spain. Hoar recounts a particularly heroic event during the battle of Jarama. The fascists had inflicted serious losses on the republican forces who were tired, wounded, hungry and poorly equipped. The forces withdrew defeated and dejected. Ryan got to his feet and rallied hundreds of men with a rendition of the Internationale. Before long the republican counter-attack had captured the enemy positions in what was an important victory in the Battle of Jarama.

His embracing of socialism and internationalism continued to develop in the highly charged political climate of Spain. After being captured at Gandesa by Italian forces, a fascist officer demanded that Ryan give the fascist salute in front of his men. He refused and the officer lined up a firing squad and again demanded that he give the salute. Still Ryan refused, calling the fascists' bluff.

Much attention has been given to Ryan's last years spent in Germany. Franco, who referred to Ryan as "my most important prisoner", handed him over to the Nazis in 1940 and was subsequently brought to Berlin where he met Sean Russell. The Nazis hoped that by returning the two to Ireland, they would ensure that Ireland's ports were not opened to Allied forces. While Ryan was prepared to accept Nazi help in returning home, Francis Stuart, who himself played a less than glorious role as assistant to Lord Haw Haw, recalls Ryan's bitter hatred of the Nazi regime. Despite many attempts to convince the Germans to assist him in returning home, Ryan died in Dresden in 1944.

Hoar's book is sympathetic account of Ryan's life. However, the mistakes of Frank Ryan are not analysed, nor are any of the lessons of his life for the struggle against imperialism and capitalism today. However, Ryan's life remains an inspiration to those today who wish to struggle for a socialist Ireland and a socialist world. His determination and willingness to sacrifice, to not shy away from a fight and his refusal to abandon the ideas and principles he held stand tall against the opportunism and abandonment of the struggle for socialism by today's trade union, labour and republican leaders.

The Corporation, based on the book The Corporation: The Pathological Pursuit of Profit and Power by Joel Bakan, is a film which shows some shocking realities to viewers, examining both pro and anti-corporation attitudes through interviews and features.

Among the 40 people interviewed are CEOs and top-level executives from a range of industries, including oil, pharmaceutical and computers.

Directors, Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbot, successfully expose corporations for what they are, money-making machines that don't care about the general public. Noam Chomsky describes it as "a wake-up call for all those who hope that there may be a decent future for their grandchildren".

Shockingly, using the USA's 14th Amendment to the Constitution, which was originally intended to protect the rights of newly freed slaves, corporations became legal "persons" and obtained the same legal and financial protection that an individual is entitled to. Unusually, but very effectively, the filmmakers examined a corporation's personality, using the American Psychiatric Associations textbook Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders. The conclusion showed that if a corporation was examined in the same way as a human, that that "person" was most certainly a psychopath. The corporation, the embodiment of capitalism qualified for every category; self-absorbed, amoral, callous, manipulative, two-faced, concerned with the gratification of its own needs, does not suffer from guilt, it breaches social and legal standards to get its way and it can mimic the human qualities of empathy, caring and altruism.

With its new status as a legal "person", the corporation rose to dominance, creating unprecedented wealth for its owners. But the consequences were countless cases of illness, death, poverty, pollution, exploitation and lies.

Unlike films such as Super-Size Me, The Corporation focused on numerous corporations showing them up as equally psychotic. The long list included IBM, Nike, Liz Claiborne, Gap, Bechtel and Shell. Each of these had at least one shocking story lurking in the background and The Corporation did its very best to illuminate it for the viewers. One of the most shocking was when Edwin Black recalled IBM's alliance with Nazi Germany which began in the first weeks that Hitler came to power and continued well into World War II. Liz Claiborne suits were made in sweat shops in which young children were working and yet they had the nerve to label that a proportion of the profit went to children's charities.

The media is shown up for exactly what it is - a tool which can be used and manipulated by any corporation which doesn't want bad publicity. Two investigative journalists for Fox News, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, found this out when they uncovered a story about BST, a Monsanto drug which increases cows' milk production. The drug was causing mastitis in the cows which was very painful and made their udders swell. The infection from the udders was ending up in milk and so were the antibiotics that were being used to treat the infection. They were told to make changes and eventually told to lie to the public. After they refused, saying that people had a right to hear the news, they were told, "We just paid $3 billion for these television stations. We'll tell you what the news is. The news is what we say it is." They tried to sue Fox under whistleblower status, which protects people who are trying to prevent others from breaking the law, but they weren't allowed to sue as it was stated that false news isn't actually against the law.

The film argued that in the corporate world of global capitalism, morality came a poor second to doing what was needed to make profit. Carlton Brown, a commodities broker said that when the twin towers were burning he thought, "How much is gold up?" and stated that he "couldn't wait for the bombs to rain down on Saddam Hussein." Michael Walker, president of Fraser Institute actually said, "Sweatshops like Nike's factories help the world's poor get plump and healthy." Sir Mark Moody-Stuart and his wife, confronted by a group of activists at their home, who accused them of being murderers didn't call the police, but had a conversation and served them tea on their front lawn. While Moody-Stuart served tea and cakes, activists were executed in Nigeria for their opposition to Shell's plundering of the country's oil.

The film makers did not stop at showing viewers the problems with corporations. They showed ways in which people can fight back against the injustices that come hand-in-hand with the success of corporations. One such example was that of the Bolivian struggle against privatisation of their water system. It showed footage of a massive protest of people who simply can't afford to pay and are refusing to do so. After this, I expected a pointer in the direction of socialism, but unfortunately this did not come and it is the film's biggest shortcoming.

Despite Fianna Fail's attempt to tone down its neo-liberal image following the drubbing it got in the 2004 local elections, the government is still pushing ahead with its privatisation agenda. A critical study of the Irish experience of privatisation then, could not be timelier. In Selling Out? Privatisation in Ireland, Paul Sweeney, economic advisor to the ICTU, attempts an analysis of Irish privatisation.

Sweeney maintains that the Fianna Fail/PD government has been the main political force for privatisation. He also acknowledges that the opposition has been "somewhat divided and unclear" on this issue. Successive governments have starved state companies of investment.

Recently, the government has discouraged the ESB from building new power plants. Instead, the company has had to hire expensive generators because the country was close to blackouts for the past three winters.

Sweeney describes several companies including the ESB, Bord na Mona, the Irish Sugar Company, RTE, Aer Lingus and Aer Rianta as "national champions". While he concedes that the original 24 state companies were sometimes overstaffed, this had the positive impact of maintaining jobs during recessions. Employment in commercial, non-financial state companies peaked at 8% of total employment in 1980, compared to just 2.5% today. As a group, state companies are profitable and in 2003, their net profits in aggregate amounted to €506 million.

In its desire to privatise, the Irish government often concluded what, in purely business terms, were very bad deals for the taxpayer. INPC, the state oil company, was sold for €106 million, less than it was worth, to US oil company TOSCO in 2001. As if this wasn't bad enough, the state took over all the company's debts and potential future liabilities to the tune of €173 million. In other words, it was sold at a potential cost to the taxpayer.

Sweeney devotes a whole chapter to Eircom, the largest privatisation in Ireland. He makes no criticism of the sale by the "Rainbow" government of 35% of the company in 1996, claiming that it was government policy to maintain "state direction" over the company through a 50.1% shareholding. In this opinion, he is at one with ICTU President David Begg, who in the backlash that followed the Eircom debacle was forced to admit that the full privatisation of Eircom was a "major mistake" but that part - privatisation would have been beneficial.

Sweeny is more comfortable when attacking the Fianna F‡il/ Progressive Democrat government, which persuaded 575,000 people in a massive publicity campaign to buy shares in a company that they already owned. Sweeney notes that while high earners made up more than half of investors, members of the skilled and unskilled working class made up almost a third of purchasers. A little over two years later, Eircom was bought out by venture capitalists. Most investors lost 30% of their investment and the state was to lose control over a key utility.

"Sir" Anthony O'Reilly's Valentia consortium sweated Eircom's assets, maintained prices as high as it could and cut investment as low as possible before selling the company off in 2004. The top four managers were paid a staggering €29 million for the period between the Valentia takeover in late 2001 and the second flotation in March 2004.

Sweeney credits the trade unions with playing "a superb hand" in the contested bid for Eircom. The deal was so good for trade union members, he notes, that it provoked hostile comment from a few financial journalists who seemed to resent "ordinary workers controlling a block of shares collectively." The deal was certainly good for Con Scanlon, General Secretary of the CWU, who received a package of €1.8 million.

Sweeney does recognise that the Eircom Employee Share Ownership Trust (ESOT) did little to advance long-term employee interests. The right-wing trade unions bureaucracy was more than willing to do the government's work for it by dangling the ESOT carrot to neutralise any opposition to privatisation. Workers can hardly be blamed for accepting shares when they have not the slightest indication that their union is willing to fight for their job security, pay and conditions by taking a principled stand against privatisation.

Sweeney concludes by drawing boundaries to privatisation. He argues that natural monopolies such as fixed line telephony, water and electricity transmission and distribution; companies of strategic importance to the national economy such as Aer Lingus; and critical infrastructure such as railway lines should never be privatised. He puts forward the idea of "public space" as a sphere where the public sector must be dominant or where the private sector should have no role at all. Drawing boundaries however, implies an acceptance of privatisation up to a point.

While Sweeney's account contains much useful information, he makes no suggestions as to how privatisations might be stopped. The least hint of independent action to stop privatisation on the part of the trade unions does not figure in Sweeney's thinking. As far as he is concerned, all the trade union movement can hope for is a hearing on the issue at the "partnership" table. The weaknesses in Sweeney's account are not incidental but are rooted in the right-wing trajectory of social democracy.

Workers in state companies and people depending on public services should be left in no doubt that in order to prevent future privatisations, they will have to fight government plans and not expect their union leaders to defend their jobs and public services.