The oppressed are always labelled the Terrorist.

[Universal Struggle]

Even revlefters do it

One of our more ignorant users said

Oh yes, we're very sorry for saving your arses from the IRA. Torturing people wasn't in Labour's constitution last time I checked, and last time I checked it wasn't politicians who tortured people, it was the police. Who are independent of the party in power.

but we cannot really listen to himas he has proven to be insane hence this magical quote

I don't have time to watch pro-terrorist propaganda. If I wanted to do that I'd switch on Al Jazeera.

Apparently it is inconcievable that if you invade ireland, then force partition on its northern inhabitants, whcih imposes loyalist tyranny on them, according to the far right Lord rees even, that this will breed resistance.

Basically, the imperialists invade somewhere, the natives fight back, yet they are scolded as terrorists, who use violence to bring about political aims, well, what the fuck is imperialism, pacifist, apparently a suicide bomber is evil, but occupation forces bombs are legitimate??

[praxis1966]

I've been saying more or less the exact same thing for years. The funny bit is there are alot of RevLefters who want to act anti-imperialist, condemning Israel and the US for their actions in the Middle East out of one side of their mouths. Then, out of the other, they call the IRA terrorists.

What's worse is that years ago, a bunch of people actually defended a guy who basically said (and I'm paraphrasing here), 'Fuck all these people marching up an' down shouting "Up the 'ra." If they got their 32 county state they'd still be standing in line going, "Where's ma dole?"' I actually saw someone else on here write that they think that all of Ireland should go back to being part of the UK and a new socialist state should be built upon that. Nobody even batted an eyelash except for me and maybe two others.

I don't know why, but there are alot of people running around with an inconsistent line on imperialism where Northern Ireland is concerned.

[NecroCommie]

Personally I agree that Northern Ireland is indeed occupied zone, at least in the capitalist context of nation-state if nothing else.

Still, as an anti-nationalist: Why Irish resistance? Why not workers resistance while you're at it?

[ContrarianLemming]

Personally I agree that Northern Ireland is indeed occupied zone, at least in the capitalist context of nation-state if nothing else.

Still, as an anti-nationalist: Why Irish resistance? Why not workers resistance while you're at it?

Any user, I've learned, who dares critcize the IRA as terrorists (they use terror as a tool, terrorism) is immediatly put down for such radical dissent.

[Universal Struggle]

all armies use terror, i dont understand the distinction, those poor bastards in dresden were pretty fucking terified.

Any war/action is terrifying to those on the recieving end

[scarletghoul]

Still, as an anti-nationalist: Why Irish resistance? Why not workers resistance while you're at it?
Many republican groups are also socialist to varying degrees, the best of them being the IRSP. But the fact is the primary oppressor in the 6 counties is British imperialism, and for most people the idea of overthrowing the 'national bourgeoisie' while leaving the imperialist english bourgeoisie in power, its just stupid. Your position is pretty ultraleftist as it completely ignores reality and the fact that the primary contradiction is between the Irish and the imperialists. Of course, as an ML its clear that the anti-imperialist struggle must be tied to a struggle for socialism too, but it would be foolish to hope for a 'purely socialist' struggle and ignore the thirst for national liberation..

[praxis1966]

Still, as an anti-nationalist: Why Irish resistance? Why not workers resistance while you're at it?

There has been workers' resistance. It's been the position of ever militant Republican organization that the end goal of Irish Republicanism is a 32 county socialist state. In fact, under the leadership of Cathal Goulding in the early and mid-1960s, the Officials were actually attempting to build a cross-community consensus along class rather than religious or ethnic lines. Besides, say what you want about the tactics of 32CSM (affiliated with RIRA) and the IRSP (affiliated with INLA), but they've never said anything apart from advocating for a socialist state. Nevermind that Republicanism in the North is by definition a workers' movement, taking up working class causes like housing and employment reform, since the militants always draw most heavily from the impoverished ethnic Irish. The analysis of Northern militants no matter what their particular tendency or acronym is that workers' liberation is of importance and British hegemony is the first stumbling block to that (at least in the North).

To put it bluntly, the only reason you think there hasn't been a long tradition of workers' movements within Irish Republicanism is because you haven't studied it very closely.


Any user, I've learned, who dares critcize the IRA as terrorists (they use terror as a tool, terrorism) is immediatly put down for such radical dissent.

Linguistically you're right. Although, I think we're all pretty aware that the words 'terrorism' and 'terrorist' are pejoratives most commonly used by ruling elites to disparage liberation movements of all kinds. It's dismissive, as it allows whomever uses it not to have to analyze the root causes and motives of the so-called terrorist, which is exactly what the ruling classes want. Because, if such an analysis is done, it might come to pass that people realize the so-called terrorist actually has a point.

That's all without addressing the real issue. The fact is that both directly, and indirectly through the policy of collusion, the British government are the real terrorists. Case in point: British security forces built the bombs that the UVF used in the single deadliest day of the entire Troubles (the Dublin and Monaghan bombings).