anti-drug vigilantes in ireland

[ed miliband]

some nuts footage here:

3VuyJn96Esk

intrigued me so i did a search and came across this, written by irish anarchist andrew flood:

http://anarchism.pageabode.com/andrewnflood/meeting-dublin-anti-drugs-movement-cpad

i mean, there's a tendency to see these movements as being controlled by irish republicanism for political gain, but i think they're pretty interesting anyhow, especially when one considers the response of the state and wider establishment (media, etc.) to them.

ireland's a strange place. when i was a kid i used to think of it as a 'third world', undeveloped country, even though i'd often go there and the 'celtic tiger' was peaking. seems silly, but even now going to places like limerick and dublin there is a level of social deprivation that i've not witnessed anywhere else. it's quite hard to explain the feeling of hopelessness in parts of limerick, it's as if the place has just been completely forgotten.

[Jimmie Higgins]

Wow. In comparing the situation in Ireland to Greece, I can't think of a clearer example of how working class suffering doesn't automatically translate to class consciousness or struggle.

At any rate, in the US we never hear about Ireland these days unless as a "good" counter-example to "bad" Greece:rolleyes:. As far as this specific issue, I do remember reading in the British press though about how heroin use was essentially unheard of in Ireland before the crisis and it's exploded.

I know there are a few Irish comrades on here, I wouldn't mind hearing a general sort of take on the state of things - as I said Ireland's crisis is rarely covered in the US press.

[ed miliband]

Wow. In comparing the situation in Ireland to Greece, I can't think of a clearer example of how working class suffering doesn't automatically translate to class consciousness or struggle.

At any rate, in the US we never hear about Ireland these days unless as a "good" counter-example to "bad" Greece:rolleyes:. As far as this specific issue, I do remember reading in the British press though about how heroin use was essentially unheard of in Ireland before the crisis and it's exploded.

I know there are a few Irish comrades on here, I wouldn't mind hearing a general sort of take on the state of things - as I said Ireland's crisis is rarely covered in the US press.

nah, this isn't true at all. bear in mind this clip is from the 90s and the anti-heroin movement in dublin goes back to the late 1970s when there was a heroin epidemic; ireland has the most heroin addicts of any eu country, and that kind of thing doesn't just happen. certainly use of the drug has increased since the recession, and it has become a bigger issue outside of just dublin, but there has been a heroin problem for a long, long time. (of course, it's always possible the piece was talking about the crisis of the 1970s, in which case it would be correct?).

for example, i found this article about heroin usage in county kerry, a very rural county where my dad is from: http://inef.ie/?p=1448

so yeah, ireland's had a heroin problem for at least thirty years and it seems to be getting worse.

[Sam_b]

I remember all the Republican Socialists on here and the bunfights about vigilantes and drugs, kneecappings and so on. It's somehow 'progressive', apparently.

Aww here's one of them (http://www.revleft.com/vb/irish-republicans-burn-t150063/index.html?t=150063&highlight=RAAD)

[ed miliband]

I remember all the Republican Socialists on here and the bunfights about vigilantes and drugs, kneecappings and so on. It's somehow 'progressive', apparently.

Aww here's one of them (http://www.revleft.com/vb/irish-republicans-burn-t150063/index.html?t=150063&highlight=RAAD)

yup, i'm not coming at it from that angle, i hope i don't have to point that out.

[fug]

Good guys. Fuck drugs.
We need more people like them. Drugs are death.

[Comrades Unite!]

Yeah its great when your legs are being broken up for being suspected of owning drugs.

These men are scum end of.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Good guys. Fuck drugs.
We need more people like them. Drugs are death.

If you want people to not use drugs, don't you think it might be more than a little counter-productive to create an environment in which admitting to drug use is likely to result in broken bones?

[Камо́ Зэд]

Someone with a busted kneecap is more likely to get addicted to opiates when he's treated for the excruciating pain.

[fug]

If the working class wants drug dealers and other scum out of its neighbourhood then it's a good thing. They will quickly learn to stop selling drugs.
Grass roots self-organization of the working people to improve their community and protect it from this plague, I see no reason to shit on that.

Or maybe we should instead call the police on these vigilantes because they are after all breaking the law and hurting poor drug dealers?
lol

[Камо́ Зэд]

If the working class wants drug dealers and other scum out of its neighbourhood then it's a good thing. They will quickly learn to stop selling drugs.
Grass roots self-organization of the working people to improve their community and protect it from this plague, I see no reason to shit on that.

Or maybe we should instead call the police on these vigilantes because they are after all breaking the law and hurting poor drug dealers?
lol

In the abstract, it would be absolutely fine if the working class were collectively deciding to combat drug problems in their communities. That isn't what's happening here. What's happening is that a bunch of anarchic vigilantes are terrorizing working class people on the pretense of addressing the community's drug problem. This kind of thing weakens the proletariat; it doesn't strengthen it.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

If the working class wants drug dealers and other scum out of its neighbourhood then it's a good thing. They will quickly learn to stop selling drugs.

That's exactly the kind of rhetorically dressed-up might-is-right reasoning behind the strategies used in the continuing failure that is the United States' War on Drugs.

It doesn't work to "stop [them] selling drugs".


Grass roots self-organization of the working people to improve their community and protect it from this plague, I see no reason to shit on that.

Are you not concerned about the effectiveness of a given activity?


Or maybe we should instead call the police on these vigilantes because they are after all breaking the law and hurting poor drug dealers?
lol

Because it's not as if the material circumstances of capitalism make drug dealing a potentially attractive option to proletarians. The negative social consequences of drugs are almost universally down to their prohibited status.

[ed miliband]

In the abstract, it would be absolutely fine if the working class were collectively deciding to combat drug problems in their communities. That isn't what's happening here. What's happening is that a bunch of anarchic vigilantes are terrorizing working class people on the pretense of addressing the community's drug problem. This kind of thing weakens the proletariat; it doesn't strengthen it.

kinda half-right; i was a little sensationalist in suggesting that the post was simply about the armed vigilantes, as the article i posted - and indeed parts of the video - do address "grassroots" community movements against drug dealing, although the extent to which these more peaceful groups and the armed vigilante groups are related is obviously open to question.

[Os Cangaceiros]

If the working class wants drug dealers and other scum out of its neighbourhood then it's a good thing. They will quickly learn to stop selling drugs.

Even states with draconian punishments for even minor drug possession often have serious problems with both drug abuse and drug trafficking. One example might be Shanghai, China, which today has a pretty big problem with heroin. Another example might be northern Mexico, where involvement in the drug trade might result in an extra-judicial chainsaw beheading. Harsh punishment does not put people off from getting into the drug trade

With drugs you have to wonder if the "cure" is worse than the disease. Mao succeeded in ridding Shanghai of the Triads during his regime, but his rule, I would argue, immiserated a large part of the Chinese population, and caste a dark shadow far larger than the Triads ever could've. Drug addiction is a public health issue, not an issue that is easily solved with thugs and guns, and personally I'd rather have social freedom and the risks associated with it than the opposite.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Apparently there was a pretty aggressive anti-drug vigilante group in South Africa, too:

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

[Nox]

I remember all the Republican Socialists on here and the bunfights about vigilantes and drugs, kneecappings and so on. It's somehow 'progressive', apparently.

Doesn't surprise me. The concept of Irish Republicanism itself is barely progressive, if at all.

It's a movement that will achieve nothing other than the creation of a new oppressed minority and thus a new national liberation movement, but this time for the Ulster-Scots/British people in Northern Ireland.

[crazyirish93]

Doesn't surprise me. The concept of Irish Republicanism itself is barely progressive, if at all.

It's a movement that will achieve nothing other than the creation of a new oppressed minority and thus a new national liberation movement, but this time for the Ulster-Scots/British people in Northern Ireland.
i sense some British nationalism in that statement.... u could have used the same about wanting a independence from any colonial power ohh no they cant do that what will all our settlers do ??

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

i sense some British nationalism in that statement.... u could have used the same about wanting a independence from any colonial power ohh no they cant do that what will all our settlers do ??

If they're born there, they can't be settlers...

[Comrades Unite!]

Doesn't surprise me. The concept of Irish Republicanism itself is barely progressive, if at all.

It's a movement that will achieve nothing other than the creation of a new oppressed minority and thus a new national liberation movement, but this time for the Ulster-Scots/British people in Northern Ireland.

I'm not with you at all on this.

The Catholics were not oppressing the Protestants, It was constant tension between both groups, Secularism is still present in N.I from the warring that occurred and the overall tensions.

[Nox]

i sense some British nationalism in that statement.... u could have used the same about wanting a independence from any colonial power ohh no they cant do that what will all our settlers do ??

You are very ignorant of history, and the situation as a whole. Not that I expected any different from a Republican.

Firstly, there is no nationalistic bias in my statement, just logic. I doubt I could say the same for you.

Secondly, Ireland did get independence from us. The people living in Ireland who were strongly opposed to independence were given a compromise by having the northern 6 counties of Ireland remain in the UK under the name of Northern Ireland. By forcing them to join a United Ireland, you are advocating the removal of their right of self-determination, and their almost certain oppression at the hands of the Irish.

Thirdly, they are not "settlers", they were born there and they have lived there since the early 1600's. Telling the Ulster-Scots to go back to Britain is the same as telling all White Americans to go back to Europe.

[Nox]

I'm not with you at all on this.

The Catholics were not oppressing the Protestants, It was constant tension between both groups, Secularism is still present in N.I from the warring that occurred and the overall tensions.

I knew someone was going to make this statement. I'm not talking about recent history, I'm talking way back, circa 17th century. This was before the Glorious Revolution, the Battle of the Boyne, etc.

Not to mention the ethnic cleansing of British civilians at the hands of the IRA during the Troubles. How anyone can support ethnic cleansing and call themselves Leftist is beyond me.

[Nox]

If anything, I think Ulster Loyalism is the more progressive of the two dominant ideologies in Northern Ireland. Yes, there are Irish people in Northern Ireland who are forced to be part of the UK against their will, but the numbers are far lesser than that of the British in Northern Ireland who would be forced to be a part of Ireland against their will if Irish Republicans had their way.

The problem with virtually all Irish Republicans and sympathisers of Irish Republicanism is that they never bother to look at it from the perspective of the British people living in Northern Ireland, who historically formed the vast majority of the population there and today still form the majority of the population there.

[crazyirish93]

You are very ignorant of history, and the situation as a whole. Not that I expected any different from a Republican.

Firstly, there is no nationalistic bias in my statement, just logic. I doubt I could say the same for you.

Secondly, Ireland did get independence from us. The people living in Ireland who were strongly opposed to independence were given a compromise by having the northern 6 counties of Ireland remain in the UK under the name of Northern Ireland. By forcing them to join a United Ireland, you are advocating the removal of their right of self-determination, and their almost certain oppression at the hands of the Irish.

Thirdly, they are not "settlers", they were born there and they have lived there since the early 1600's. Telling the Ulster-Scots to go back to Britain is the same as telling all White Americans to go back to Europe.

No we got a free state first then a republic with "Independence" and i do not accept that line in the sand drawn up by the treaty and i also do not advocate oppression of anyone based on where they are from what religion,colour so if it was my choice no one would be oppressed.

[Bronco]

If anything, I think Ulster Loyalism is the more progressive of the two dominant ideologies in Northern Ireland. Yes, there are Irish people in Northern Ireland who are forced to be part of the UK against their will, but the numbers are far lesser than that of the British in Northern Ireland who would be forced to be a part of Ireland against their will if Irish Republicans had their way.

The problem with virtually all Irish Republicans and sympathisers of Irish Republicanism is that they never bother to look at it from the perspective of the British people living in Northern Ireland, who historically formed the vast majority of the population there and today still form the majority of the population there.

How on earth could Ulster Loyalism ever be thought of as "progressive"?

[Nox]

How on earth could Ulster Loyalism ever be thought of as "progressive"?

It isn't. It's just less reactionary than Irish Republicanism. Poor choice of wording on my part.

[Nox]

No we got a free state first then a republic with "Independence" and i do not accept that line in the sand drawn up by the treaty and i also do not advocate oppression of anyone based on where they are from what religion,colour so if it was my choice no one would be oppressed.

By forcing the Ulster-Scots to join Ireland against their will, you are inherently oppressing their political freedom. Not to mention that every time they have been ruled over by the Irish, they have been brutally oppressed.

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

..and we're off topic again
With regard to the OP, this is so viscious and reactionary, 'drugs and the people involved in them are bad, bad people get knee-capped, hooray for local justice'. No better than stereotype 70s coppers.