INLA an "Investigation" by the BBC.

[IrishWorker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gie8yo3X9oY[QUOTE]

[IrishWorker]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdIP4xwyJtY&feature=related

[Woyzeck]

Not great is it?

[IrishWorker]

Not great is it?

Honestly mo chara would we expect anything else from the BBC its Brit propaganda.

But saying that no other footage exists of the IRSM in that time period they were dangerous days when the INLA/IRSP suffered some of its worst defeats and greatest victories there are allot of very well known faces in the "documentary" it is one of the only times I have ever heard Jimmy Brown speak before he was killed by the INLA.
My motive for posting it wasn’t to brag about the INLA/IRSP or anything like that but just to throw it out there we all can see it for what it is.

Jimmy Brown was a good INLA vol before he was turned against the movement he killed many loyalist reactionaries and RUC/British army members before he formed the IPLO there is a school of thought within the IRSM that believes that the IPLO was formed to break the back of the IRSM as a whole by British agents and agent provocateurs in both the INLA PIRA and the British Intelligence services as the INLA/IRSP never really recovered to full strength after the split and feud.

During the feuds it is interesting to note that most of the people killed were the political back bone and theorists of the INLA/IRSP revolutionaries who understood the value of Republican Socialist Ideology and people who were able to articulate it to the masses Seamus Costello and Ta Power to name but a few the logic in taking political theorists out was that you end up in a situation where the head has been cut of the “snake” for want of a better phrase and the movement trudges along killing and bombing with no political direction.

This situation suited both the British and the Provos as both knew that the INLA/IRSP could not be brought into the establishment or reformed as its Republican Socialist ideology forbad such a situation.

The only way the British or the Provos could deal with the IRSM as a whole was to infiltrate it and assassinate key members and sadly to a certain extent it worked.

If the Ta Power document had have been properly implemented when it was written was could be sitting in a very different Ireland today.
Link to the Ta Power Documenthttp http://www.marxist.com/Europe-old/ta_power_document.htm

[Hoggy_RS]

I think the IRSM is seeing somewhat of a revival these days, althought the video seemed to give the impression that the movement was not destined to last!

Long live the IRSM!

[Ravachol]

Honestly mo chara would we expect anything else from the BBC its Brit propaganda.

But saying that no other footage exists of the IRSM in that time period they were dangerous days when the INLA/IRSP suffered some of its worst defeats and greatest victories there are allot of very well known faces in the "documentary" it is one of the only times I have ever heard Jimmy Brown speak before he was killed by the INLA.
My motive for posting it wasn’t to brag about the INLA/IRSP or anything like that but just to throw it out there we all can see it for what it is.

Jimmy Brown was a good INLA vol before he was turned against the movement he killed many loyalist reactionaries and RUC/British army members before he formed the IPLO there is a school of thought within the IRSM that believes that the IPLO was formed to break the back of the IRSM as a whole by British agents and agent provocateurs in both the INLA PIRA and the British Intelligence services as the INLA/IRSP never really recovered to full strength after the split and feud.

During the feuds it is interesting to note that most of the people killed were the political back bone and theorists of the INLA/IRSP revolutionaries who understood the value of Republican Socialist Ideology and people who were able to articulate it to the masses Seamus Costello and Ta Power to name but a few the logic in taking political theorists out was that you end up in a situation where the head has been cut of the “snake” for want of a better phrase and the movement trudges along killing and bombing with no political direction.

This situation suited both the British and the Provos as both knew that the INLA/IRSP could not be brought into the establishment or reformed as its Republican Socialist ideology forbad such a situation.

The only way the British or the Provos could deal with the IRSM as a whole was to infiltrate it and assassinate key members and sadly to a certain extent it worked.

If the Ta Power document had have been properly implemented when it was written was could be sitting in a very different Ireland today.
Link to the Ta Power Documenthttp http://www.marxist.com/Europe-old/ta_power_document.htm

Wouldn't be the first time too. Infiltration, false flag attacks and encouraging sectarianism has been a strategy used by the state on numerous occasions.

[IrishWorker]

Wouldn't be the first time too. Infiltration, false flag attacks and encouraging sectarianism has been a strategy used by the state on numerous occasions.
The PRM are a fine example "scap" and Donaldson.

[IrishWorker]

I think the IRSM is seeing somewhat of a revival these days, althought the video seemed to give the impression that the movement was not destined to last!

Long live the IRSM!


It certainly is and is producing some very politically aware Republican Socialists with outstanding leadership qualities.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHltQhOjHhs

[Woyzeck]

The PRM are a fine example "scap" and Donaldson.

Far more damaging than British provocateurs is the absence of class analysis in traditionalist/mainstream Republican politics. For all its faults this is at least what separates the IRSP (and éirígí, to a lesser extent) from Sinn Féin and the cheerleaders of the IRA's splinters. The "Real" IRA or the "Continuity" IRA would cut a deal with the British and Unionist establishment were they in a position to do so. Hopefully the inane, knuckle-dragging mentalities that pass for politics in these organisations will not see a revival. When you boil it down it essentially amounts to 'out-Republicaning' the "traitors" and "sell-outs". Garbage.

[IrishWorker]

Far more damaging than British provocateurs is the absence of class analysis in traditionalist/mainstream Republican politics. For all its faults this is at least what separates the IRSP (and éirígí, to a lesser extent) from Sinn Féin and the cheerleaders of the IRA's splinters. The "Real" IRA or the "Continuity" IRA would cut a deal with the British and Unionist establishment were they in a position to do so. Hopefully the inane, knuckle-dragging mentalities that pass for politics in these organisations will not see a revival. When you boil it down it essentially amounts to 'out-Republicaning' the "traitors" and "sell-outs". Garbage.
Agreed.

If the "knuckle draggers" as you put it refuse to recognize that the battle field has changed and the Imperialists have won the propaganda war against armed republicanism then it is to there own detriment.
You will always see the IRSM call for Republican unity as it is an essential part of any revolution to have all revolutionary forces moving strategically in the one direction but it is political unity not military unity that the IRSM calls for as the conditions for revolution in Ireland will be created off the back of radical political activism not through sporadic acts of violence.

[Woyzeck]

Agreed.

If the "knuckle draggers" as you put it refuse to recognize that the battle field has changed and the Imperialists have won the propaganda war against armed republicanism then it is to there own detriment.
You will always see the IRSM call for Republican unity as it is an essential part of any revolution to have all revolutionary forces moving strategically in the one direction but it is political unity not military unity that the IRSM calls for as the conditions for revolution in Ireland will be created off the back of radical political activism not through sporadic acts of violence.

But this is the thing -- the likes of the 32 CSM and Republican Sinn Féin aren't radical. They're an albatross around the neck of the IRSM and will continue to be if unity is continuously pursued. What benefit is there in uniting politically with these people?

[IrishWorker]

But this is the thing -- the likes of the 32 CSM and Republican Sinn Féin aren't radical. They're an albatross around the neck of the IRSM and will continue to be if unity is continuously pursued. What benefit is there in uniting politically with these people?

As I have said before the IRSM are great believers in unity and a broad front of all shades of Republicans and Socialists against the Ruling Class but you raise a perfectly valid question,” What benefit is there in uniting politically with these people?
The answer to that question is currently there is absolutely no benefit whatsoever in a political pact with the 32S RNU or other independents who support violence.
To elaborate more on my last comment the IRSM has pulled away from an umbrella group called the Irish Republican Forum for Unity (IRFU) as the IRSM realize that among other things it is damaging to the progressive elements within the IRSM to be publicly aligned to people who refuse to change with the times and evolve there politics to meet the challenges Imperialist Brittan and the Irish Ruling Class throw our way.

[CamiloTorres]

As I have said before the IRSM are great believers in unity and a broad front of all shades of Republicans and Socialists against the Ruling Class but you raise a perfectly valid question,” What benefit is there in uniting politically with these people?
The answer to that question is currently there is absolutely no benefit whatsoever in a political pact with the 32S RNU or other independents who support violence.
To elaborate more on my last comment the IRSM has pulled away from an umbrella group called the Irish Republican Forum for Unity (IRFU) as the IRSM realize that among other things it is damaging to the progressive elements within the IRSM to be publicly aligned to people who refuse to change with the times and evolve there politics to meet the challenges Imperialist Brittan and the Irish Ruling Class throw our way.

What're you on about? For one thing, the RNU don't support violence and for another Republicans will achieve nothing in isolation. The IRSP have abandoned their core principles as laid down by Seamus Costello by saying that armed struggle has no place at all in their political programme.

[IrishWorker]

What're you on about? For one thing, the RNU don't support violence and for another Republicans will achieve nothing in isolation. The IRSP have abandoned their core principles as laid down by Seamus Costello by saying that armed struggle has no place at all in their political programme.

Making politics paramount is the only vehicle towards social change in Ireland the armed struggle has been tried and failed.
The IRSP have not abandoned its core principals by saying it will purse the conditions fro revolution by "exclusively peaceful means" even Costello would have realized that war with Brittan today is an unwinable war.
The INLA has been on a cessation since 1998 what did you think was going to be the logical out come of that cessation?

[Andropov]

But this is the thing -- the likes of the 32 CSM and Republican Sinn Féin aren't radical. They're an albatross around the neck of the IRSM and will continue to be if unity is continuously pursued. What benefit is there in uniting politically with these people?
Absolutely, in this current context.
How ever if it was A broad Anti-Imperialist front with class based politics at the forefront then I would support the IRSP's inclusion.
But that is not how the IRFU manifested itself, it was worth a shot to see if our Politics could immerse itself in the IRFU how ever it was the opposite that occured.
We became subsumed by Cul De Sac Republicanism that has nothing to do with the IRSP's politics.
I fully support the leaderships decision to withdraw from the IRFU.

[Andropov]

and for another Republicans will achieve nothing in isolation.
Untiy is progressive of course but within given contexts.
The way the unity project manifested itself in the IRFU was not progressive to our class struggle.

The IRSP have abandoned their core principles as laid down by Seamus Costello by saying that armed struggle has no place at all in their political programme.
I believe that was addressed after the statement at Bray.
It was a mistake in the speech that should not have been said.
If that were the case you would have seen massive splits in the IRSM which isnt the case.
So you would do well not to be so quick to correct IW on his analysis of the RNU and you to dictate to him what the IRSP's politics are.

[Woyzeck]

So sayeth the L5I:


Bernie McAdam 17/10/2009

Bernie McAdam argues that the the Irish Republican Socialist Movement has taken a step in the wrong direction, spreading the illusion that a "peaceful political struggle" can unite Ireland.

The Irish Republican Socialist Movement, which comprises the Irish Republican Socialist Party (IRSP) and the Irish National Liberation Army (INLA), has issued a statement which declares 'that the armed struggle is over and the objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic will be best achieved through exclusively peaceful political struggle'. The statement goes on to fully support 'the move to build a left wing party that has a clear objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic' and to 'build a left political alternative in Ireland and support the struggle against global capitalism'.

INLA has been on a ceasefire for the past 11 years. The IRSM quite reasonably concluded that the failure of the guerrilla campaign against British forces and the ever withering support for it demanded a new orientation. This was correctly viewed within the context of rejecting the Good Friday Agreement which saw the historic sell out of Sinn Fein to British Imperialism. This latter act was copper fastened by Sinn Fein's power sharing with the Democratic Unionist Party in government, supporting the notorious sectarian police force PSNI and decommissioning arms under the supervision of the imperialist de Chastelain decommissioning body.

Whilst the commitment to a peaceful road to a united Ireland is a dangerous illusion, the IRSM's call for a new left wing party is to be welcomed. A conference to discuss the building of a new anti imperialist and anti capitalist party in Ireland should now be called. The depth of the crisis facing Irish workers demands a new party active in all the struggles of workers, not just an electoral alliance. There is an urgent need for a conference of the left to discuss a new political party of the working class where different tendencies can co exist.

How can Ireland be united?

In any new formation that emerges Workers Power will fight to ensure that any programme adopted will argue for a revolutionary overthrow of capitalism. In doing so we would necessarily reject the notion now being argued by the IRSM that either the removal of Britain from Ireland or the establishment of a Workers' Republic can be achieved through 'exclusively peaceful political struggle'.

This is a totally mistaken conclusion drawn from the failures of the guerrilla war that was waged by the Republican movement before the Good Friday peace agreement. Capitalism is a system wracked by war, oppression and exploitation which does not allow for the luxury of a peaceful challenge to its rule. Even the meagre demands of the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Movement were met with the batons of the RUC and physical violence by loyalist thugs. If the British soldiers left it would only be because they had broken the Republican movement utterly and crushed any prospect of further opposition to the existence of the six counties.

Revolutionary socialists have no illusions in a peaceful, parliamentary road to socialism. The rich and powerful will not surrender their positions of power without a struggle. The Bolshevik Revolution with its workers militia, workers councils (soviets) under the leadership of a revolutionary party testify to the necessary role of force in a revolutionary situation. As workers move into battle with the bosses and their state they will develop their own means of defence whether it be defending their picket lines and occupations against state forces or defending communities under attack as in the case of Catholic, Roma families subject to loyalist terror. The emergence of Connolly's Irish Citizen's Army was a direct response to a savage attack on Dublin workers by the bosses in 1913.

The mounting attacks on Catholic areas in 1969/71 brought forth mass organised defence. The Citizens Defence Committees were an expression of this need. Unfortunately this struggle was derailed into an elitist guerrilla campaign, of which the INLA formed a small part, substituting itself for mass action and serving to leave the masses passive and increasingly alienated from the struggle. Of course socialists should stand four square behind Republicans in the armed struggle against the imperialists but only a mobilised working class throughout Ireland using strikes, occupations and a workers' militia could have effectively brought that struggle to victory.

The IRSP in their flight from guerrillaism now seem to have also ditched any formal attachment to a revolutionary party. In common with republican groups the question of physical force is reduced to an elitist conspiracy not as a means of collective armed defence for the masses. Up till now, drawing on ideas expressed in an earlier written Ta Power document, the IRSP have said the main task is to develop a revolutionary party to lead the struggle for a Workers' Republic where the military element is subordinated to the political. They were keen to show the need for supporting social and economic struggles alongside their involvement in the anti imperialist struggle unlike the narrow nationalists of the Provisionals and the economistic dismissal of the national question by some far left groups.

However even this 'Republican Socialism' was still very far removed from a Marxist approach. Seamus Costello and Ta Power were at one in promoting the primacy of the struggle for national liberation in Ireland. They wrote "the major contradiction in Ireland today… is the continued British occupation of the six counties and the resulting denial of our right to self determination and sovereignty". Further it entails "mobilising the mass of the Irish people in the struggle for National Liberation" (Supplement to Starry Plough '87). This failed to see the struggle against capitalism as the strategic question for the Irish working class.

The central contradiction in Ireland today is a class question, the primary struggle on one that that pits Irish workers against Irish capitalists. The Irish ruling class is undoubtedly a weak capitalist class compared to the major imperialist ones and is very much dependent on US, Euro capital but this contradiction cannot just be resolved through a national liberation struggle against the British. Only a workers' revolution throughout the island overthrowing native and foreign capitalism can finally resolve the national and class questions. Only working class action north and south including democratically controlled armed mass defence with a strategy of uninterrupted struggle from democratic and national demands through to a Workers Republic could have avoided the inevitable sell outs of republicans.

Of course there still remains an unfinished national struggle against the occupation of the six counties, but groups like the Socialist Party and the Socialist Workers Party have consistently downplayed or ignored it. The perspective and strategy of Trotsky's permanent revolution has always been to locate the working class as the driving force in leading any struggle to resolve the national question, which can only be consistently achieved by overthrowing capitalism itself. Such a strategy should underpin any new programme for a socialist revolution in Ireland.

The depth and scale of the recession in Ireland combined with defeat of the national struggle has generated a crisis of direction amongst socialists and republicans. There will be members and supporters of the IRSM thoroughly shocked by the recent turn outlined in the statement. Equally there will be those members looking forward to life without a military wing. For all involved in the IRSM it is time to think afresh about what kind of revolutionary programme we need.

Workers Power is open and honest about wanting to engage in serious discussion on the way forward. Socialists have a duty to their class to spell out a strategy to abolish a capitalist system that has brought untold misery to billions. One step in that direction is laying the foundations of a working class party that can lead to its abolition. Socialists throughout Ireland should discuss and decide on a revolutionary programme for such a party right now.

[Andropov]

So sayeth the L5I:
There were faults within the statement and as recognised by the leadership of the IRSM.
Hence why only a day or two after the Bray statement the INLA released a statement categorically denying any decomissioning or the like.
So I wouldnt base your analysis on the IRSM's political line only on the Bray statement.

[Woyzeck]

There were faults within the statement and as recognised by the leadership of the IRSM.
Hence why only a day or two after the Bray statement the INLA released a statement categorically denying any decomissioning or the like.
So I wouldnt base your analysis on the IRSM's political line only on the Bray statement.

I just posted that to show someone out there cares. :lol:

Personally I have no time for the L5I, but at least they talk some sense on the Irish national question.

[IrishWorker]

There were faults within the statement and as recognised by the leadership of the IRSM.
Hence why only a day or two after the Bray statement the INLA released a statement categorically denying any decomissioning or the like.
So I wouldnt base your analysis on the IRSM's political line only on the Bray statement.

Full statement with the offending line in Bold.

STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE LEADERSHIP OF THE IRISH REPUBLICAN SOCIALIST MOVEMENT

The INLA and IRSP were formed in 1974 in order to create a 32 County Socialist Republic. In those 35 years military volunteers and political activists have fought with courage and honour and have struck at the heart of the British military and political machine in Ireland and in Britain. The INLA is a key constituency within the Republican Socialist Movement (RSM). The INLA recognised that its struggle was based upon two distinct phases:

(1) Armed Resistance
(2) Political Organisation

In 1994 the INLA put in place a no first strike policy and in 1998 called a complete cease-fire. Both of these decisions were based on its political analysis and monitoring of the changing military and political environment. The recent progress on loyalist decommissioning can be traced back to the INLA’s “no first strike policy” of 1994 and the INLA acknowledges this progressive step by loyalism.

The RSM has been informed by the INLA that following a process of serious debate, consultation and analysis, it has concluded that the armed struggle is over and the objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic will be best achieved through exclusively peaceful political struggle.

The RSM agree with this analysis and are fully supportive of the move to build a left wing party that has a clear objective of a 32 County Socialist Republic based on the principles of equality, justice, inclusion, human rights and dignity.

It is within the above objective that the RSM opposed the Good Friday Agreement and continues to do so. We as a movement believe that the Six County State is not a viable political entity, which cannot be reformed and fitted into a flawed two State solution.

The RSM has always aspired to the principle of the primacy of politics as espoused by Ta Power.

The future struggles are political. We urge all comrades, members, volunteers and supporters to join the political struggle ahead with the same vigour, commitment and courage that was evident in our armed struggle against the British State.

To para-phrase James Connolly ‘let us arise’, build a left political alternative in Ireland and support the struggle against global capitalism.


Ultimately our allegiance is to the working class, onwards to victory.

[IrishWorker]

Should have read "the conditions for the revolution that will establish our 32 County Socialist Republic will be pursued by exclusively peaceful means"

In my own personal opinion.

[CamiloTorres]

Untiy is progressive of course but within given contexts.
The way the unity project manifested itself in the IRFU was not progressive to our class struggle.

I believe that was addressed after the statement at Bray.
It was a mistake in the speech that should not have been said.
If that were the case you would have seen massive splits in the IRSM which isnt the case.
So you would do well not to be so quick to correct IW on his analysis of the RNU and you to dictate to him what the IRSP's politics are.

But his analysis of the RNU was incorrect, since that group have stated that armed struggle is tactically wrong in the current climate.

How was the IRFU not progressive to the class struggle? What alternatives will we be seeing from the Irps in the next few months and years?

And as for the slurs against Republican groups for not bering "progressive" enough, I would suggest actually reading some of the works produced by these groups as well as motions passed at their Ard Fheisanna. For example, RSF's last Ard Fheis had motions declaring their struggle to be for a workers republic, while their recently-departing leader Ruairi Ó Brádaigh wrote works such as "Restore The Means Of Production To The People" which advocated workers co-ops and industrial democracy. Similarly the 32CSM passed motions declaring their group to be fighting for a socialist republic; another motion declared community councils to be a part of the party's platform.

Don't judge groups by their support or lack of support for armed struggle, it's analytically lazy.

[IrishWorker]

But his analysis of the RNU was incorrect, since that group have stated that armed struggle is tactically wrong in the current climate.

How was the IRFU not progressive to the class struggle? What alternatives will we be seeing from the Irps in the next few months and years?

And as for the slurs against Republican groups for not bering "progressive" enough, I would suggest actually reading some of the works produced by these groups as well as motions passed at their Ard Fheisanna. For example, RSF's last Ard Fheis had motions declaring their struggle to be for a workers republic, while their recently-departing leader Ruairi Ó Brádaigh wrote works such as "Restore The Means Of Production To The People" which advocated workers co-ops and industrial democracy. Similarly the 32CSM passed motions declaring their group to be fighting for a socialist republic; another motion declared community councils to be a part of the party's platform.

Don't judge groups by their support or lack of support for armed struggle, it's analytically lazy.
I have covered the 32s copy and pasted AGM motions and the lip service RSF pays to socialism and all the rest of the shite you talk about “armed revolution” when the CIRA has killed one peeler since 1986 the RIRA has killed 2 Brits since 1998.
So stick your rosary beads up your arse lad.
Grow up and stop living in the past you Neanderthal.
If the RIRA or CIRA want to fight a war then that’s ok I won’t miss a few dead cops or brits but don’t try and tell me they are socialist revolutionaries Im no 16 year old ejit from the Bogside in Derry or the Falls RD in Belfast I can see through your twisted Nationalist politics.

[CamiloTorres]

I have covered the 32s copy and pasted AGM motions and the lip service RSF pays to socialism and all the rest of the shite you talk about “armed revolution” when the CIRA has killed one peeler since 1986 the RIRA has killed 2 Brits since 1998.
So stick your rosary beads up your arse lad.
Grow up and stop living in the past you Neanderthal.
If the RIRA or CIRA want to fight a war then that’s ok I won’t miss a few cops or brits but don’t try and tell me they are socialist revolutionaries Im no 16 year old ejit from the Bogside in Derry or the Falls RD in Belfast I can see through your twisted Nationalist politics.

RSF don't pay lip service to socialism, they espouse it in their policy documents and in actions like demonstrating with striking workers, for job creation etc. The rosary bead stuff is a cliché as well.

I don't believe armed struggle is a prequisite to being a Republican either.

I'm not living in the past either, but looking toward the future. Oh and since when do Republicans use "nationalist" as a pejorative term? Left wing nationalism is a very important part of Republicanism, to argue otherwise is to ignore history.

[IrishWorker]

RSF don't pay lip service to socialism, they espouse it in their policy documents and in actions like demonstrating with striking workers, for job creation etc. The rosary bead stuff is a cliché as well.

I don't believe armed struggle is a prequisite to being a Republican either.

I'm not living in the past either, but looking toward the future. Oh and since when do Republicans use "nationalist" as a pejorative term? Left wing nationalism is a very important part of Republicanism, to argue otherwise is to ignore history.
Is this the same RSF who speak at ultra right wing conferences in Italy?
In my eyes RSFs Nationalism is right wing Nationalism.
The RSF Kildare blog has informed us that "On March 21 Des Dalton was welcomed to Fermo by the Mayor Saturnino Di Ruscio who made a presentation to the RSF Vice President. In turn Des presented the Mayor with a signed copy of the biography of Ruairí Ó Brádaigh." Saturnino Di Ruscio is a member of the People of Freedom party who are the largest right wing party in Italy.

The conference was advertised on the right-wing fascist site, LaDestra.info which considers itself the "The portal for information on the Italian Right". The site boasted that the conference would deal with "Ireland and the struggle against Imperialism" and promised it would be recalling the " history of the most important figures like Bobby Sands and remembering also the value of the Irish traditions"

RSF said the debate was hosted by Officinal Nazional Popolare (National Popular Workshop), but what they didn't mention was that this group are linked to Le Destra (The Right) who are themselves linked to the European National Front.

The La Destra party are far right wing in their ideology and are actively "campaigning on the old fascist trinity of God, Fatherland and Family. The party's symbol is the old neo-fascist tricolour flame." (The Independent)



http://rsf-kildare.blogspot.com/ (http://rsf-kildare.blogspot.com/)


Des Dalton at conference in Italy

ADDRESSING a conference in Italy entitled 'Ireland and the struggle against imperialism’ Republican Sinn Féin Vice President Des Dalton said: “It is not enough to oppose imperialism abroad unless you are prepared to oppose it at home, you must be prepared to oppose it wherever it is found”.

The conference was held in the Italian town of Fermo on March 21 and was hosted by a local group of young political activists called ARIES Officina Nazional Popolare.

Des Dalton spoke about the events in Ireland and explained that the recent attacks in the Occupied Six Counties were the result of the continued British occupation. RSF representative in Italy, freelance journalist Massimiliano Vitelli gave an outline in Italian of the history of the struggle for Irish freedom. He also read an extract in Italian of the diary of Bobby Sands. The conference was attended by the assistant Mayor of Fermo as well as a number of local university academics and political activists.

On March 21 Des Dalton was welcomed to Fermo by the Mayor Saturnino Di Ruscio who made a presentation to the RSF Vice President. In turn Des presented the Mayor with a signed copy of the biography of Ruairí Ó Brádaigh.

Source...
http://www.***************/forum/showthread.php?t=585571


So here are your partys Fascist politics for all to see RSF put up on a pedestal by the European Right on stormfront.
Now do me a favor and fuck of you right wing bastard.

[CamiloTorres]

Is this the same RSF who speak at ultra right wing conferences in Italy?
In my eyes RSFs Nationalism is right wing Nationalism.
The RSF Kildare blog has informed us that "On March 21 Des Dalton was welcomed to Fermo by the Mayor Saturnino Di Ruscio who made a presentation to the RSF Vice President. In turn Des presented the Mayor with a signed copy of the biography of Ruairí Ó Brádaigh." Saturnino Di Ruscio is a member of the People of Freedom party who are the largest right wing party in Italy.

The conference was advertised on the right-wing fascist site, LaDestra.info which considers itself the "The portal for information on the Italian Right". The site boasted that the conference would deal with "Ireland and the struggle against Imperialism" and promised it would be recalling the " history of the most important figures like Bobby Sands and remembering also the value of the Irish traditions"

RSF said the debate was hosted by Officinal Nazional Popolare (National Popular Workshop), but what they didn't mention was that this group are linked to Le Destra (The Right) who are themselves linked to the European National Front.

The La Destra party are far right wing in their ideology and are actively "campaigning on the old fascist trinity of God, Fatherland and Family. The party's symbol is the old neo-fascist tricolour flame." (The Independent)


Des Dalton at conference in Italy

ADDRESSING a conference in Italy entitled 'Ireland and the struggle against imperialism’ Republican Sinn Féin Vice President Des Dalton said: “It is not enough to oppose imperialism abroad unless you are prepared to oppose it at home, you must be prepared to oppose it wherever it is found”.

The conference was held in the Italian town of Fermo on March 21 and was hosted by a local group of young political activists called ARIES Officina Nazional Popolare.

Des Dalton spoke about the events in Ireland and explained that the recent attacks in the Occupied Six Counties were the result of the continued British occupation. RSF representative in Italy, freelance journalist Massimiliano Vitelli gave an outline in Italian of the history of the struggle for Irish freedom. He also read an extract in Italian of the diary of Bobby Sands. The conference was attended by the assistant Mayor of Fermo as well as a number of local university academics and political activists.

On March 21 Des Dalton was welcomed to Fermo by the Mayor Saturnino Di Ruscio who made a presentation to the RSF Vice President. In turn Des presented the Mayor with a signed copy of the biography of Ruairí Ó Brádaigh.



First off I agree that attending that conference was a terrible mistake, but I don't think it should be enough to condemn RSF as a fascist movement. About a week ago they also attended a conference organised by an Italian Communist Party, and in the past have attended meetings with Cuban Communists, does this mean they are communist as well?

They don't espouse a jingoistic nationalism nor have they ever called for some sort of reverse plantation. On the contrary their Eire Nua document was praised by members of the unionist community and remains a touchstone for methods on reaching out to those who would be opposed to a united Ireland.

[CamiloTorres]

I'm definitely not right wing either, in fact I'm not even a member of RSF if that was the basis for that statement. I'm simply a Republican who believes we have more strength in unity rather than in the divided state we have at the moment.

[Hoggy_RS]

The problem abou engaging in any kind of unity with RSF and the 32CSM i that, although they may officially follow a left wing line, their memberships are full of conservative catholic nationalist reactionaries. There are anti-immigrant members in RSF, we all know this. It would be, in my opinion, impossible for the IRSM, as a Marxist party, to work with these types of groups. I hope RSF and 32CSM come around to our way of thinking but at the moment I think the ideological divide is too great.

[Andropov]

But his analysis of the RNU was incorrect, since that group have stated that armed struggle is tactically wrong in the current climate.
As was your analysis on the IRSM, as was my point.

How was the IRFU not progressive to the class struggle?
Could you please tell me any class based initiatives the IRFU have helped spearhead?

What alternatives will we be seeing from the Irps in the next few months and years?
More class based politics aimed directly at mobilising, agitating and educating the working class.

And as for the slurs against Republican groups for not bering "progressive" enough, I would suggest actually reading some of the works produced by these groups as well as motions passed at their Ard Fheisanna.
The problem is I have read their motions, as how I came to my conclusion.

For example, RSF's last Ard Fheis had motions declaring their struggle to be for a workers republic,
Ohh was this the same Ard Fheis where RSF proposed "Irish jobs for Irish workers"? Aye?

while their recently-departing leader Ruairi Ó Brádaigh wrote works such as "Restore The Means Of Production To The People" which advocated workers co-ops and industrial democracy.
And is this the same Ruairi Ò Bràdaigh who described himself as a bulwark against communism or something to that effect. Aye?

Similarly the 32CSM passed motions declaring their group to be fighting for a socialist republic;
Were these the same motions that the 32CSM's "Italy Cumman" copied and pasted from a previous IRSCNA motion proposals?

another motion declared community councils to be a part of the party's platform.
This is just comical, really shows the complete lack of class politics in the 32CSM tbh.
Where were these proposals drawn from exactly?
The rantings of a walter mitty fantacist that im sure your well aware of called Cael.
You should ask around here and see what the general politically educated concensus on that clown is.
It just shows the complete amateurish nature of the 32CSM that they will have Ard Fheis motions based on the internet ramblings of an ill educated narcicisst with NAZBOL politics.

Don't judge groups by their support or lack of support for armed struggle, it's analytically lazy.
Well hence I have wagered your flimsy examples of the 32CSM and RSF's class based politics with more than sufficient examples of their theoretical bankruptcy so hence that assumption of yours their is redundant.
Just for posterity I might aswell also mention how RSF's current president attended a conference held by Italian Neo-NAZI and even presented them with a gift, a signed copy of Ruairi Ò Bràdaighs autobiography.
If only my analysis on the 32CSM's and more importantly RSF's "class politics" was based on a prejudiced outlook on their respective "wars", maybe then it wouldnt be so embarressing for Republicanism when you really look at their theoretical vacuum.

[Andropov]

I'm not living in the past either, but looking toward the future. Oh and since when do Republicans use "nationalist" as a pejorative term? Left wing nationalism is a very important part of Republicanism, to argue otherwise is to ignore history.
Ohh dear.
Could you define "Left Wing Nationalism" for me please?
This should be interesting.

[CamiloTorres]

The problem abou engaging in any kind of unity with RSF and the 32CSM i that, although they may officially follow a left wing line, their memberships are full of conservative catholic nationalist reactionaries. There are anti-immigrant members in RSF, we all know this. It would be, in my opinion, impossible for the IRSM, as a Marxist party, to work with these types of groups. I hope RSF and 32CSM come around to our way of thinking but at the moment I think the ideological divide is too great.

With RSF there's no way their membership is full of conservative nationalists. Yes, there's a small amount, but at their last Ard Fheis the number of progressive motions from around the country demonstrated a strong left wing current (especially since there were zero questionable motions, you would expect 1 or 2 if the conservative elements were as strong as claimed).

With the 32s I'm not too sure, their motions were a lot more straightforward, I think their Italian branch put forward a few socialist motions, I was also impressed by their endorsement of community councils. Apart from that I'm not too sure but I'd say from meeting their members they seem to be progressive people, some going so far as to call themselves communists.

Do you feel that RSF and the 32s would have to become fully Marxist before you'd work with them, or just move more explicitly to the left?

[Andropov]

First off I agree that attending that conference was a terrible mistake, but I don't think it should be enough to condemn RSF as a fascist movement.
I dont think anyone with a political analysis would define RSF as Facist, I certainly wouldnt.
But this is a perfect example of their complete lack of theoretical class based politics.
Do you honestly think a party with a proper political education in class politics would make the same "mistake".
Never the less just because I would not define RSF as Facist I would still recognise they have some unhealthy reactionary attitudes within the party.
And btw the Rosary Beed stigma is not just a myth, ive seen it done myself.

They don't espouse a jingoistic nationalism nor have they ever called for some sort of reverse plantation.
Groundbreaking.

On the contrary their Eire Nua document was praised by members of the unionist community and remains a touchstone for methods on reaching out to those who would be opposed to a united Ireland.
Thanks for bringing this point up, its actually very impotant its addressed.
Eire Nua is yet another shining example of RSF complete lack of class politics.
Eire Nua is an abomination to any Marxist thinker.
It is courting and appeasing Reactionary anti-working class Loyalists and Unionists by giving them their own portion of Ireland.
It is an appeasement to our enemys and even though the reasons behind why they trumpet Eire Nua as their gospel are somewhat moral it is still an abomination.
There is no compromising with reactionary elements.
Connolly and Costello both recognised this with "Gas and Water Socialists" and "Ring road socialists" and Eire Nua is just another decrepit attempt to appeal to a reactionary ideology.

[Hoggy_RS]

With RSF there's no way their membership is full of conservative nationalists. Yes, there's a small amount, but at their last Ard Fheis the number of progressive motions from around the country demonstrated a strong left wing current (especially since there were zero questionable motions, you would expect 1 or 2 if the conservative elements were as strong as claimed).

With the 32s I'm not too sure, their motions were a lot more straightforward, I think their Italian branch put forward a few socialist motions, I was also impressed by their endorsement of community councils. Apart from that I'm not too sure but I'd say from meeting their members they seem to be progressive people, some going so far as to call themselves communists.

Do you feel that RSF and the 32s would have to become fully Marxist before you'd work with them, or just move more explicitly to the left?
The 32CSM in Italy(which I believe is just one person) copied IRSCNA motions word for word. They haven't a clue.

On ir.net(probably the biggest republican forum), 32csm members have time and time again shown themselves to be homophobic, anti immigration and generally against any kind of socialist politics.

I have also came across a number of right wing RSF members, who were quite anti-immigrant. RSF needs to purge itself of any reactionaries before id except them.

Preferably they'd be marxist, but just a truely leftist party that does not contain any kind of reactionaries or right wingers could be worked with.

[CamiloTorres]

Could you please tell me any class based initiatives the IRFU have helped spearhead?

I felt it had success in picketing DPP meetings and the like, but if the IRSP felt they weren't undertaking enough class-based initiatives why didn't they push for them within the organisation rather than abandoning the whole thing? Did they go into the broad front thinking class-based initiatives would be undertaken?


More class based politics aimed directly at mobilising, agitating and educating the working class.

What would this entail? I've heard similar stuff from the IRSP for years, but haven't seen any occurring in my area (although to be fair I've heard good stuff about your work in other places). Will we see more events like public meetings?


The problem is I have read their motions, as how I came to my conclusion.

And yet from all those motions you managed to pick out the one that was admittedly reactionary (though heavily defeated) while missing out the many progressive ones?


And is this the same Ruairi Ò Bràdaigh who described himself as a bulwark against communism or something to that effect. Aye?

Where did he say this?


Were these the same motions that the 32CSM's "Italy Cumman" copied and pasted from a previous IRSCNA motion proposals?

This is just comical, really shows the complete lack of class politics in the 32CSM tbh.
Where were these proposals drawn from exactly?
The rantings of a walter mitty fantacist that im sure your well aware of called Cael.
You should ask around here and see what the general politically educated concensus on that clown is.
It just shows the complete amateurish nature of the 32CSM that they will have Ard Fheis motions based on the internet ramblings of an ill educated narcicisst with NAZBOL politics.

Like I've stated before, I don't know too much about the 32CSM's stance on class politics besides some of their individual members and those Ard Fheis motions. I wouldn't dismiss them as reactionaries though, from what I've read even if they don't have explicit class-based politics they also don't espouse reactionary opinions either.
As for the idea of community councils, I feel it is a good idea and one not just created by Cael. What about the ideas of Murray Bookchin for example, is it not better to see socialism implemented from below on a municipal basis?


Well hence I have wagered your flimsy examples of the 32CSM and RSF's class based politics with more than sufficient examples of their theoretical bankruptcy so hence that assumption of yours their is redundant.

I'd say your examples of RSF-as-reactionaries are flimsy, since they amount to the one Ard Fheis motion (out of hundreds) that might be called reactionary (and was rejected by the membership), one attendance at a conference that wasn't a meeting of fascists but an Irish history lecture (a mistake rather than a statement of RSF's solidarity with the European Right) and an un-attributed statement apparently made by Ó Brádaigh that is ambiguous even if true.

Ohh dear.
Could you define "Left Wing Nationalism" for me please?
This should be interesting.
Anti-colonial nationalism, not based on national chauvinism but a desire to seek a country’s freedom from imperialist forces, to see it develop without hindrance and allow it to fight alongside other oppressed peoples in a spirit of international solidarity.

I dont think anyone with a political analysis would define RSF as Facist, I certainly wouldnt.
But this is a perfect example of their complete lack of theoretical class based politics.
Do you honestly think a party with a proper political education in class politics would make the same "mistake".
Never the less just because I would not define RSF as Facist I would still recognise they have some unhealthy reactionary attitudes within the party.
And btw the Rosary Beed stigma is not just a myth, ive seen it done myself.
I agree, the party at times ignores the issue of class. This is something that must be rectified, and I feel this process is beginning going by recent pickets, Ard Fheis motions and so on. However, I don’t think it is sufficient to describe a party as either Marxist or reactionary, there’s not such a stark choice. RSF are in the middle in my opinion, but moving if not toward Marxism then to a fully left wing position.
I have seen the Rosary recited at commemorations too, but I don’t know why you would use it to attack RSF; all Republican organisations have did it in the past including the IRSP, it’s not a statement of religious nationalism or something.

Thanks for bringing this point up, its actually very impotant its addressed.
Eire Nua is yet another shining example of RSF complete lack of class politics.
Eire Nua is an abomination to any Marxist thinker.
It is courting and appeasing Reactionary anti-working class Loyalists and Unionists by giving them their own portion of Ireland.
It is an appeasement to our enemys and even though the reasons behind why they trumpet Eire Nua as their gospel are somewhat moral it is still an abomination.
There is no compromising with reactionary elements.
Connolly and Costello both recognised this with "Gas and Water Socialists" and "Ring road socialists" and Eire Nua is just another decrepit attempt to appeal to a reactionary ideology.
It’s not handing over a portion of Ireland to reactionary Loyalists/Unionists, it’s assuring ordinary Protestants that they won’t be forced into a united Ireland or made unwelcome, but will be allowed to participate fully through a de-centralised system. My one criticism of the policy would be that it isn’t fully fleshed-out. I would like to see RSF explain how Eire Nua would be implemented to benefit the whole Unionist community rather than those reactionaries who currently hold power.

[Andropov]

I felt it had success in picketing DPP meetings and the like,
A sad indictment of the RFU, picketing DPP meetings?
Certainly not the class based politics I envisige.

but if the IRSP felt they weren't undertaking enough class-based initiatives why didn't they push for them within the organisation rather than abandoning the whole thing?
Ohh believe me from what I have heard they did.
They did try but were crippled with the milestone of the reactionary agenda of some other prominent Republicans involved in the RFU.
I wont go into names here but at a joint march the IRSM colour party was leading it and a very prominent member of the 32CSM actually berated the colour party for leading with the red flag as the IRSM always does.
Just yet another snippet of the reactionary agendas that the IRSP was forced to struggle with.

Did they go into the broad front thinking class-based initiatives would be undertaken?
From my information I have heard the IRSM was told that Socialism would not be at the forefront of the RFU from the very start but there was a belief that we could change it from within and steer it to our political agenda, towards a more class based initiative.
This did not come to fruition and as such it was time to part ways and put it down to a learning curve.

What would this entail? I've heard similar stuff from the IRSP for years, but haven't seen any occurring in my area (although to be fair I've heard good stuff about your work in other places). Will we see more events like public meetings?
Well at the minute I myself am working on a Homeless campaign tied in with the banker bailout, I think its a good initiative and one that will help raise the consciousness of working class people.
TBH I can only speak for what the RSYM is doing, you would have to consult with an IRSP member for details on their campaigns.
As for public meetings I think they are a great initiative to get our politics across.
I helped organise one last year in my area and hopefully they will become a more common occourence for the IRSP.
Just with the restructuring at the minute things will be a bit hectic for a month or two.

And yet from all those motions you managed to pick out the one that was admittedly reactionary (though heavily defeated) while missing out the many progressive ones?
Yes of course, that motion is something that the BNP would be proud of.
It is not merely a blip or a mistake, it is a farce and indicitive of the lack of political education and class awareness within RSF and the certain reactionary currents within RSF.
And those progressive motions that were raised, were they passed or defeated?
And if they were passed what have RSF actually done to act upon them?

Where did he say this?
In his auto-biography I believe but I can confirm that for you.
Not surprising really since he was a pal of Sean South, the man who said "Communists should be crushed like worms".
Quaint if you think about.

Like I've stated before, I don't know too much about the 32CSM's stance on class politics besides some of their individual members and those Ard Fheis motions.
Indeed I know certain members who are Maoists and the like.
But overall the 32CSM complete lack of class based politics is quite startling.

I wouldn't dismiss them as reactionaries though, from what I've read even if they don't have explicit class-based politics they also don't espouse reactionary opinions either.
Its true they shouldnt be defined as Reactionarys but I am discussing their theoretical vaccum with regaurds class politics.
That in itself is damning.

As for the idea of community councils, I feel it is a good idea and one not just created by Cael.
I think its timeing is a little more than a coincidence IMO.
I dont believe in coincidences.

What about the ideas of Murray Bookchin for example, is it not better to see socialism implemented from below on a municipal basis?
Could you expand a bit more on that becuase I am not sure what you are refering to.

I'd say your examples of RSF-as-reactionaries are flimsy, since they amount to the one Ard Fheis motion (out of hundreds) that might be called reactionary
A motion calling Irish jobs for Irish people?
A motion that cannot be attributed to Socialism of any kind.
But im not argueing they are quasi-facist or the like, im just saying they are political illiterates with some unsavoury reactionary currents within the party.

one attendance at a conference that wasn't a meeting of fascists but an Irish history lecture (a mistake rather than a statement of RSF's solidarity with the European Right)
It was a facist meeting, there is no two ways about it.
The Italian facists they gave a gift to actually call for the killing of immigrants in Italy.
There is no two ways about it, they were at a meeting hosted by facists, the topic of discussion is alrgely irrelevant given this context.
And if indeed it was a mistake where was the partys retraction, the distancing themselves from meeting and bearing gifts to facists?

and an un-attributed statement apparently made by Ó Brádaigh that is ambiguous even if true.
Not really.
It shows his complete disregaurd for class politics IMO.

Anti-colonial nationalism, not based on national chauvinism but a desire to seek a country’s freedom from imperialist forces, to see it develop without hindrance and allow it to fight alongside other oppressed peoples in a spirit of international solidarity.
National Liberation?

I agree, the party at times ignores the issue of class. This is something that must be rectified, and I feel this process is beginning going by recent pickets, Ard Fheis motions and so on.
If that is indeed the case I fully support their drift to the left.

However, I don’t think it is sufficient to describe a party as either Marxist or reactionary, there’s not such a stark choice. RSF are in the middle in my opinion,
Either do I.
RSF are certainly not Marxist, but arent a wholey Reactionary entity.
As I have stated before they have reactionary currents within the party and a shocking lack of class politics but on the whole arent Reactionarys.

but moving if not toward Marxism then to a fully left wing position.
What in the name of god is a fully left wing position?
Left-Communism? Anarchism? Social Democracy?

I have seen the Rosary recited at commemorations too, but I don’t know why you would use it to attack RSF; all Republican organisations have did it in the past including the IRSP, it’s not a statement of religious nationalism or something.
I have never ever seen the rosary recited at an IRSM commemoration.
It is one thing saying it in a personal capacity and it is another thing saying it when representing your political party.
Especially when secularism is a coner stone of Republicanism.
That is why I use it to attack RSF, they are neglecting a core principle of what Republicanism and Socialism stands for.

It’s not handing over a portion of Ireland to reactionary Loyalists/Unionists, it’s assuring ordinary Protestants that they won’t be forced into a united Ireland or made unwelcome, but will be allowed to participate fully through a de-centralised system.
Well this analysis demonstrates zero marxist analysis.
Firstly Eire Nua does not assure protestants that they will be made welcome because Protestants live all over Ireland.
This particualrly ridiculous concept is only catering to Loyalism and Unionism by granting them a form of semi-autonomy.
So please dont feed me that RSF drivel.
Its a deeply flawed paper that caters to reactionary elements within Ireland, it does not "assure" Protestants.

My one criticism of the policy would be that it isn’t fully fleshed-out. I would like to see RSF explain how Eire Nua would be implemented to benefit the whole Unionist community rather than those reactionaries who currently hold power.
As pointed out above, Eire Nua merely caters to a reactionary ideology.

[PRC-UTE]

It’s not handing over a portion of Ireland to reactionary Loyalists/Unionists, it’s assuring ordinary Protestants that they won’t be forced into a united Ireland or made unwelcome, but will be allowed to participate fully through a de-centralised system. My one criticism of the policy would be that it isn’t fully fleshed-out. I would like to see RSF explain how Eire Nua would be implemented to benefit the whole Unionist community rather than those reactionaries who currently hold power.

The Eire Nua document states that: "...the Unionist-oriented people of Ulster would have a working majority within the Province and would therefore have considerable control over their own affairs." It was devised to placate the far right of loyalism by maintaining their sectarian privileges. Republicanism has nearly always completely misunderstood what Loyalism is. It is a fascist ideology and movement.

It's not surprising that Eire Nua was devised by southerners who didn't understand what life under a unionist regime was like for non-unionists. It's also unsurprising that most northern IRA volunteers eventually rejected it, and the IRSP completely rejected it from the start.

Leaving all that aside, Eire Nua's economic ideas are completely outdated.

[IrishWorker]

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