Pioneers of British Anarchism: George Barrett

  • Posted on: 16 June 2019
  • By: thecollective

From Freedom News UK

Features,

To mark the launch of new Freedom Press title Our Masters Are Helpless, we will be publishing a number of historic reprints about historic anarchist figures from our 130-year store of articles, starting with the firebrand himself, George Barrett. Originally written in 1947, this essay by Mat Kavanagh (himself a figure of note) was part of a series which attempted to rescue British activists from the obscurity that seemed destined to be their lot in the aftermath of World War I and II.


THIS brief sketch is a slight tribute to the memory of a young comrade who died at the early age of 33 after a long and hard struggle with consumption.

It can safely be said that George Barrett was one of the clearest thinkers and one of the most brilliant speakers of his day. He had every asset a speaker needs; tall and of good appearance, a ready wit and an exceptionally good flow of cultured English. Either as a speaker or writer he went straight to the root of things, pushing all superfluous matters on one side.

It was his grasp of scientific and economic truths that enabled him to see the necessity for revolutionary thought and action. He knew that nothing short of a complete revolutionary change in the basis of society would be of any social value. He would never compromise with his ideas, and his integrity was always apparent and above suspicion.

One is tempted to look back and wonder what he would have written and said of some of his erstwhile active and good comrades: one, a Cabinet Minister now — Jim Griffiths; the other a reactionary jingo leader of the Miners’ Federation — Will Lawther!

The first stage of Barrett’s activities was in the Bristol Socialist Society. His straightforward revolutionary views and outspoken denunciation of the parliamentarians made it impossible for him to remain a member of the society, however, and soon after he left he came out as an open anarchist. Shortly afterwards he came to London, and started to work at Waltham Abbey as a draughtsman. He at once joined the Waltamstow Anarchist Group, then a virile group of working men who did good work locally. Barrett’s energy was tremendous. He spoke almost every night in the week, and would often cycle 20 miles each way to address a meeting, and that after a day’s work.

After a propaganda visit to Glasgow he was keen on settling there, for he saw the latent possibilities of a strong movement. He succeeded in getting work in Glasgow, and with the financial assistance of George Davidson, he was able to start a weekly paper The Anarchist, of which 34 issues appeared. He threw himself heart and soul into the work, doing his editorial work after his day in the office. But he also addressed evening and dinner-hour meetings, and at one such meeting of strikers he led an attack on one of the wharves where blacklegs were working. The police arrested him, but later decided that it was .better to leave the strikers alone and so dropped the charge. Nevertheless, the incident cost him his job, and because of it he changed his name from Ballard to Barrett, the name by which he is chiefly known.

Both before and during his editorship of The Anarchist he had most successful lecturing tours through England and Scotland, often touching towns where the message of revolt was heard for the first time. On these tours he formed groups which remained active until World War I scattered them, and now not even a trace of them seems to remain.

Some of the work done in those days by the Glasgow group is still secret history, but one incident to their credit should now be made public. When Jim Connolly’s paper The Harp*, was suppressed and their machinery dismantled by the Dublin police, Barrett at once got into touch with Connolly, and the paper was printed at The Anarchist’s printery and successfully smuggled into Ireland. The police raided Freedom in London, and every other likely place, but never the right one. The Glasgow comrades acted in the traditions of anarchism, that every invasion of human rights should be resisted. The first number of The Anarchist came out on May Day, 1913.

Barrett made his last speech at a demonstration at Edinburgh. A t this meeting he caught a chill and consumption rapidly developed. After a terrific struggle he died at Torquay in January, 1917. He lived to see much of his work undone by the war. Yet his ardour and his faith never faltered, even when he was badly smitten. In his magnificent pamphlet The Last War, he showed that the workers are fighting to settle their masters’ quarrels, and that the real war is fought to take over the mines, railways, factories, and fields.

This pamphlet was condemned by the government— But not before 10,000 copies had been sold. Later on Freedom Press published two other pamphlets by him, The Anarchist Revolution and Objections to Anarchism. The collected essays of George Barrett would make a fitting memorial to his brilliant abilities.

Mat Kavanagh

Our Masters Are Helpless, a collection of Barrett’s key essays along with a number of articles originally written for Freedom, is out now.


*Ed’s note: Kavanagh misremembers a little here. Barrett did contact Connolly, but is was related to the shuttering of the Irish Worker. A separate article going into more depth on the subject will be published at a later date.

Comments

Of course you can only be testosterone cis normative when form 100 years ago...

But of course, god was testosterone cis normative back then.

Very negative comments on Barrett. Nobody is saying that the anarchists of 100 years ago are much better than those of today. However we must record the activities of anarchists through the ages. We have a history that we can be proud of and learn from. Without a history we become a people with no history or culture. I think it was George Orwell that stated "The best way to destroy a people is to destroy their history". No doubt the anarchists of today will have their hard work recorded, It is a benefit to the anarchist world wide and helps to spread our story, hopefully they will not need to wait 100 years for that to happen.

Anyone who lists the names of Stalinists to be aware of is doing society a favor, and not a snitch.

That call-out Inquisitor Orlov and the NKVD were the Secret Police.

I wouldn't have an issue with anyone "snitching" on Red fascists who tortured to death radicals like Andres Nin, who was skinned alive by agents of Stalin. Andres Nin was one of Orwell's best buddies during the Civil War.

Back in the days there was a dangerous superstructure in support of the national Bolchevik mafias. The historical equivalent of the Appelistas had a potential for organized violence that wasn't limited to just ganging up on some individuals to send them to hospital. They had guns, money, moles, an intelligence agency, a background hierarchy and above all a supportive foreign power. They were part of a foreign administration and their Comrades were taking their orders from the General Secretary of the Party. Hence, the pigs.

That doesn't mean that the statements isn't true. Measure the meaning in the words, not the flaws in the messenger.

r u a parody?

Strange as it may seem, I'm a human being trying to do my wee bit in make sense of this world in which we live.

it’s okay, fellow traveller : )

i am a parody tho

"Without a history we become a people with no history or culture. "

let me count the ways that i disagree:

1. "a people"
2. "no history"
3. "no culture"

i am an anarchist, and i want no part of your history, culture, or - most of all - collective concept of "a people".

i disagree with the language part! and the internet part!

chrr chrr grr grr!

By identifying as anarchist, you are drawing yourself with a people, their culture and their history. In the realm of anarchy of course there are many different visions and positions.

To claim that you reject culture is preposterously idealistic. You are made of culture... what makes you come on this site and write in a specific language with more or less specific vocabulary IS culture.

And where would your anarchy be without its own history? This means no Novatore, no Stirner, to Bonnot Gang, no Spanish Civil War, no Luddites, no Voltairine, no Emma, no autonomous communes, no squat parties, no Bomberman, no Free Mercedes, no George Barrett, etc. Ergo... just you facing the void.

Well no actually... more like just you, along with a bunch of authoritarian historical ghosts dancing around you.

The world, including your world, is made of narratives. There is no naked Truth, because you aren't going around naked in the first place.

shh, ur making too much sense ; )

Libertad, who I don't really agree with, has a pretty interesting text on this called The Cult of Carrion. I don't know that the epistemological break from the historical process is possible, but, do wonder if the predisposition to glorify history isn't somewhat negative.

Yea, let's all just forget what has gone before and blindly dance into the darkness, nobody can teach us anything, we know it all.

I was not denying the importance of remembering anarchos from the past. But let's just observe the (huge) historical nuances there is to make... like I don't think it's an irrelevant exercise to be speculatively framing them in the current contemporary context, in order to understand your current context.

That can be a very stimulating exercise with unpredictable potentialities! Instead of hanging this guy in a picture frame on the Anarchist Gallery, we do the opposite and place him in the frame of our own lives. Taking inspiration from the dead; not making a cult out of them.

To record the actions of dead anarchists is not making a cult out of them, you may wish to, that's up to you, but the idea is to remember them, there actions and learn from them. All you anarchist ideas and actions were not born in your head in isolation, you got them from somewhere, probably from trying to make sense of the world we live and and in some cases from other anarchist, dead and alive.

Add new comment