IRA

[symtoms_of_humanity]

Who agrees with the IRA and who is against it, support your opinions. I am for the IRA becuase the Irish should have their country back, and the Brits. should get out, I am infact Irish, but I don't care about the religious war, to me its a war for Irish freedom. I agree more with the RIRA becuase the only way to get the Brits. to listen is with force, the peace talks of the PIRA have gotten them no where.

[Donnie]

I was born in Southern Ireland but i don't support terroist attacks. Revolution not reigns of terror on innocent people it doesn't help get the support of the British public.

[spartafc]

Check out Trotsky's "Why Marxists oppose Individual Terrorism" - it explains it better then I could.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1909/tia09.htm

[symtoms_of_humanity]

I don't support terrorist attacks such as attacks on hotels and train stations that harm innocents, but in NI i think people should attack the military and cops that are there, like in the 70's and 80's, the peace talks are going no where, and Ireland has gained more from fighting than talking

[symtoms_of_humanity]

I would like to point out, I don't belive killing a prison warden that is cruel, or prison guards that are cruel to prisonors as terrorism(such things happend in the late 70's and 80's in and around the Maze in NI)

[Batman]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 10:59 PM
Check out Trotsky's "Why Marxists oppose Individual Terrorism" - it explains it better then I could.

http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/works/1909/tia09.htm
Wasnt Trotsky commander of the Red Army?

[danny android]

I definitly support the IRA but I agree with you that the religious war is complete freakin non-sense. The IRA should definitly be more agressive in trying to get what they want. Maybe not as extreme as starting a war. But they deffinitly need to find a way to back up there demands.

[Weatherman Underground]

Wasnt Trotsky commander of the Red Army?
Yeah, and a hero of the revolution. Without him it would have been hard to imagine the Bolsheviks winning the civil war. Then that bastard Stalin, who had nothing whatsover to do with the revolution exiled and later killed him.

[slim]

I am a supporter of the Pre-Free State IRA of Michael Collins and figures like Treacy and with squads like the twelve apostles. This army had the support of the people. I agree with the PIRA of 1969-1972, their main objective was to stop Protestants burning their homes and forcing evictions with support of the British. The Battle of the Bogside and of Ballymurphy are good reasons to support this reaction from catholics. Internment is also another reason, when you see footage of prisoners smearing their excrement on their cell walls to avoid beating from the guards you find yourself struck by this harsh realism of the situation. Bloody Sunday was another case for support.

However, by their actions after this including Bloody Friday, they lost their main support. I am very symathetic towards them but will not advocate their cause. The main reason I disagree with them is that they hate communism and Marxism because of the Original IRA after the '56-62 campaign. Goulding was leftist in ideas and the provos used this leftism to further the local support from the O's to the provos.

[symtoms_of_humanity]

I didn't know they were anti-left, but it is still a struggle for freedom and an end to imperialism none the less

[Deutsche Ideologie]

The majority of people in Northern Ireland WANT to be part of Britain. You people are brainwashed.

[symtoms_of_humanity]

The let them move to Britan, Ireland should be one unified country

[LSD]

The let them move to Britan, Ireland should be one unified country

The argument that Ireland "should" be unified is the same argument for saying that the British Isles "should" be unified ...namely it isn't one.

Yeah, Ireland was arbitrarily and unfairly divided up, but that's what countries are. The boundries of pretty much every country on earth are equally ludicrous. Ireland was split up based on religious lines which, honestly, makes about as much sense as basing it on "cultural" or "national" ones.

As leftists, we cannot be concerned over "nations". Our priority must be the international working class, wherever they are. The question should not be whether it's an Irish or UK flag that waves in Norther Ireland, it should be what would be best for the Irish worker.

And honestly, can any of you say that an IRA "victory" would really help them?

The IRA is a reactionary nationalist organization fighting a religious war, their fight is most definitely not ours.

[violencia.Proletariat]

ira is a waste of time, they havent accomplished anything but killing people. this isnt the times of a modest proposal anymore people.

[symtoms_of_humanity]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 27 2005, 04:15 AM

The let them move to Britan, Ireland should be one unified country

The argument that Ireland "should" be unified is the same argument for saying that the British Isles "should" be unified ...namely it isn't one.

Yeah, Ireland was arbitrarily and unfairly divided up, but that's what countries are. The boundries of pretty much every country on earth are equally ludicrous. Ireland was split up based on religious lines which, honestly, makes about as much sense as basing it on "cultural" or "national" ones.

As leftists, we cannot be concerned over "nations". Our priority must be the international working class, wherever they are. The question should not be whether it's an Irish or UK flag that waves in Norther Ireland, it should be what would be best for the Irish worker.

And honestly, can any of you say that an IRA "victory" would really help them?

The IRA is a reactionary nationalist organization fighting a religious war, their fight is most definitely not ours.
Makes alot of sense, I just think the peace talks are getting no where, and that Ireland should be owned by the Irish, I realise there is a huge religious war, but many IRA just want the British out, and i agree boarders are ludacris, but there needs to be a start, and the Irish and British will never work together, so just let the Irish have it, the way its supposed to be, then work from there

[codyvo]

I support what they are fighting for, but I do think that they often go overboard, like killing the innocent british civillians. I also disagree with some of the radicals in the organization who think that the british in Northern Ireland should move back to england, that is almost as bad as the americans who think blacks should go back to africa.

[LSD]

so just let the Irish have it, the way its supposed to be, then work from there

Yes, but why is that the "way its supposed to be"?

How is a united Ireland any better for the people than united British Isles?

You need to put aside national labels and realize that nationalism is a tool of the bouregois to keep the workers seperate. To keep them concentrating on petty things like flags and lines on the map instead of fighting their real enemy.

Instead of starting with nationalism and moving on to progress, why not start progressive?

Doesn't that make more sense?

[symtoms_of_humanity]

It does, but the Bristish being in Ireland is a sign of Imperialism, just the same with the US in Puerto Rico and many other countrys, yet I understand what you have said and you have changed my views, but I think the Irish should just have thier land back, they settled the land, the British invaded and took over, Scotland won its independance from Britan by fighting, and i understand the need for the workers to unite, but Britan has absolutly no business being in Ireland

[LSD]

Yes, British presence in Ireland is a vestige of British imperialism and it's wrong.

But all states are wrong!

Our fight shouldn't be against Britain, but against capitalism, a crime of which the Irish government is just as guilty as the British.

Supporting the IRA means merely supporting one capitalist bourgeois state over another. Instead, we must support complete liberation, from Britain, from Ireland, from Catholicism, from Protestantism, from hierarchy no matter what flag it flies or name it calls itself.

It doesn't matter if the man with the whip is from Dublin or Belfast or Manchester or London so long as he has a whip. Replacing one master for another only bennefits the new master, the worker is still a slave.

Ireland should be free, but it should be FREE. Free from all oppression, whether it be British or Irish or both. The IRA isn't fighting for that. It's fighting for a change in boss, we're fighting for an elimination of bosses. And so our fights are not compatible.

[Des]

live in belfast

dont support the ira - full of thugs (but then again so are the rest)

if they got their free state they'd all be crying "wheres my dole? - where my DLA...? what do you mean i have to work?" ahh bahhhh

[Sir Aunty Christ]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 04:50 PM
live in belfast

dont support the ira - full of thugs (but then again so are the rest)

if they got their free state they'd all be crying "wheres my dole? - where my DLA...? what do you mean i have to work?" ahh bahhhh
Is that the voice of David Vance I hear?

[slim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 04:22 AM
ira is a waste of time, they havent accomplished anything but killing people. this isnt the times of a modest proposal anymore people.
They stopped internment, made civil rights for catholics much better. Many catholics died to give you the rights you have now, be more grateful.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 11:50 AM
live in belfast

dont support the ira - full of thugs (but then again so are the rest)

if they got their free state they'd all be crying "wheres my dole? - where my DLA...? what do you mean i have to work?" ahh bahhhh
So are the DUP and the Orange Order (full of thugs that is). I've an idea, why don't you go back to playing dolls with your girlfriend Ian Paisley? Leave the intelligent discussion to people interested in it.

LSD: I take your point, but the fact is eliminating corporate and parochial dictatorship are concerns which are secondary until Ireland has full autonomy within it's borders (borders which are not artificial but physical in this case). The fact is, the right of the people to self-determination should and must be absolute. It's actually kind of funny, you know. People like you will scream until they're blue in the face about British, American, and Israeli tyrrany in the Middle East, and then turn around and argue in defense of tyrrany and exploitation elsewhere. In this case it happens to be Ireland.

Nobody here is talking about trading one boss for another. It is essential that the Irish people have a right to self-determination; if they choose a socialist state it should be on their own terms. Not because some jack booted orange wearing fascist points a gun at you and says so. The DUP, the UV, and the British authority have to be removed from NI as they are the single largest stumbling block to worker's revolution in Ireland; what with the first two terrorizing people simply because of their religion and the third cow towing to them both. Under the current order it's simply impossible to think of anything else aside from decolonialization.

Anyway, I hear alot of noble talk from you people disavowing the IRA's violent tactics. As a matter of fact, the IRA is currently engaged in internal dialogue as to what their future might be and whether a change in tactics is in order. I hear no such talk from you in reference to the DUP, the UV, or the Orange Order which continue to terrorize neighborhoods in the Six Counties, especially now since it's 'parade season.'

[Invader Zim]

The IRA (+ various splinter groups IE the RIRA) - A bunch of nationalists who bomb random people, smuggle drugs, raqueteer, extort, humilate and maim people. In other words thugs.

Reminds me of the British empire, ironic, aye?

but no doubt this thread will attract all those who say "I don't support the IRA" but then defend them to the hilt.

In fact, the IRA's activities in the 80's and 90's if anything decreased any progress in making Northen ireland a soverign state or attatching it to the republic. Thus making the IRA not only a bunch of thugs, but obsolite thugs.

[RememberThe10]

Why must people always try to class it as a sectarian war? The objective of the IRA is acheiving a united Ireland for everyone, not just catholics.

[Des]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 05:50 PM
So are the DUP and the Orange Order (full of thugs that is). I've an idea, why don't you go back to playing dolls with your girlfriend Ian Paisley? Leave the intelligent discussion to people interested in it.

yes hence "(but then again so are the rest)"

oh so if one doesnt support the ira he must support the DUP / Ian Paisley? ummm ok..

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 07:07 PM
Why must people always try to class it as a sectarian war? The objective of the IRA is acheiving a united Ireland for everyone, not just catholics.
Wrong, the object of the IRA is to make money at the point of a gun, which they have been very successful at. If that want the case, then the two RIRA boys in prison for drug trafficing would be at home.

[RememberThe10]

The RIRA is a seperate organisation from PIRA and one which does not have the support of the PIRA, so that point is irrelevant. U seem like u have made your mind up on this subject already so not sure if its worth debating with u...

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by Des+Jun 30 2005, 01:10 PM--> (Des @ Jun 30 2005, 01:10 PM)
[email protected] 30 2005, 05:50 PM
So are the DUP and the Orange Order (full of thugs that is). I've an idea, why don't you go back to playing dolls with your girlfriend Ian Paisley? Leave the intelligent discussion to people interested in it.

yes hence "(but then again so are the rest)"

oh so if one doesnt support the ira he must support the DUP / Ian Paisley? ummm ok.. [/b]
Well, when you make blatantly bigoted statements such as those in your first post I can't help but think you must.

Isn't that just like the slavemaster, though? When he's finally forced to give up his slaves and they require work, he refuses to hire them on account of their ethnicity. Then, he turns around and calls them 'lazy' and claims they just want handouts when it was his own bigotry that caused their unemployement in the first place. And you dare use Che as your avatar.

[Des]

here man.. i can use whatever image i please as a avatar...

trust me man - offer such people im referring to jobs and you'll get this reply "job? wha? me? work? its just not me mate!" they dont want to work - they dont want to be educated

ive grown up - still currently live in working class west belfast - i know how they behaved in schools - ive watched them grow up - make nothing of themselves, do nothing, help nobody, squat of society but yet they are the first to yell "tiocfaidh ar la", "up the 'ra", "brits out!"

of course thats the same on the other side..

the IRA of old, I would have supported - this current generation, I wouldnt

but im not not saying everyone within the organization is like that - alot are well educated - understand where they are coming - know the history etc etc but alot are just generally "larger louts"- that being a good way to describe them i suppose...

but eh - what do i know?

a bigot - somthing ive never been called before - deary me..

always a first for everything....

[symtoms_of_humanity]

I agree this new generation is nothing, but the movemnets of the 70's and 80's were amazing, and LSD I see where you're coming from but the people of Ireland should be free along with all other people, in order for Irish to belive they can work Autonomously I think they must have thier own country, then once that occurs they can then start to see past the boarders, but until the Brits are out, they will never see that

[Seven Stars]

Most of you have been informed by the Pro-Brit media and know nothing of the IRA, its sad. For one thing the IRA is for a Socialist Republic, so they do not support a capitalist state. They do not deal drugs no Republican group does. Loyalist groups such as the LVF do. The pro-brit media claims that the INLA do, but it is not true. The Provisional IRA do not hold the right to be called the IRA. They have given up the struggle and have turned to Constitutional politics which history has shown us will never lead to the Republic. The only group who holds the right to be called the IRA is the IRA under the leadership of the Continuity Army Council, otherwise known as the Continuity IRA. You should check out my website for some more info on Irish Republicanism www.upthera.net

[Hiero]

I think we are using religion in the same way the capitalist used relgion, to split movements. Some are not supporting the IRA because of religion, while there is probally hate between both religious groups this doesn't mean both are fighting for religion.

This happens with the Palastinian liberation movements, many don't want to support groups because the media focus most on relgion.

Its up to the Communists to make a decision on which movements are primarily fighting Imperialism and Zionism like the PLFP, IRA etc and which are primarily fighting for relgious movements Jemiah Islamiah.

While some groups like the IRA may get their inspiration from religion, are they fighting for a Catholic republic? or a Irish Republic that incorporates the North?

Your'e a Philistine if you split movements based on religion, when they are primarily fighting against imperialism.

I think it is clear that the IRA was built to fight British Colonialism primarily. Today i dont have enough knowledge to comment on the current issue.


trust me man - offer such people im referring to jobs and you'll get this reply "job? wha? me? work? its just not me mate!" they dont want to work - they dont want to be educated

If this guy had of been talking about Black people, Muslims, or Latins you would all be having a cry.

[Hiero]

I think i have posted this before but it has smoe relevance in here

“Left, Left? Marching with the Right…”
Notes on the Irish Left who prefer struggle to victory

“Hysterical spurts are of no use to us.
What we need is the steady march of the iron battalions of the proletariat."
Lenin

You can see them chanting at all demos for any cause. They always carry politically correct posters. They are noisier than any one else. They are very good at chanting, with the experienced “lead singer” and the response choir who knows their well rehearsed text. Actually, this is the only thing they do professionally and with genuine pleasure. Noisy manifestations are their specialty. Their style and methods of recruiting have something of the Jehovah Witnesses. Indeed, invariably their participation in any demonstration ends up with calling on people to join their organization.

One day they support the peoples of Yugoslavia, Iraq or Palestine. Another – striking nurses, bus drivers or refugees in danger of being deported. Placards will be ready on time, exactly the same as in the hands of their comrades in other countries. Where do they get money for this? I do not know, but one source who I trust claims that covertly they do not shy away from publishing pornographic magazines to raise money for their party publications. Still these might be just malicious rumors. They can’t be that cynical, can they? On the other hand, nobody beats them up in the street, nobody arrests them. No revolutionaries come out of their ranks to become the pride of the Irish people.

They are much more willing than anybody else to criticize other leftists for what they see as their insufficient radicalism, their preoccupation with routine, small-time, “non-revolutionary” activities aimed to provide everyday assistance on a local level, to organize a working class neighborhood and to give its residents faith in their power to fight back. At times, one can get the impression that their main enemy is not world capitalism, which, as they claim, is about to expire anyway, with the world revolution coming shortly all by itself like the Last Judgment. One can even get the impression that their main enemy are other leftists rather than world capital, because so many of their activities are designed exclusively in opposition to other left groups and used not so much for the officially proclaimed purposes but rather as a pretext to accuse their “brethren” in the lack of radicalism. In the heat of their prosecutorial remonstrations the struggle against world capitalism and its very existence somehow imperceptibly recede to the background. Indeed, why bother with world capitalism if it is about to go all by itself…if only those “fake leftists” stop being spoilers?

I met Grace Lally and her comrades at the protests against the war in Yugoslavia. She is classical representative of that revolutionary type who scream loudly in the anticipation of the Shiny Future.

I cannot say that she does nothing else. On one occasion the loud screams of Grace and her comrades helped to save one family from eviction by their landlord. This idealist young woman, with a short boyish haircut is also an absolutely honest, deeply convinced in the truth of her ideas representative of her organization – the Socialist Workers Party of Irish Trotskyites.

At first, she clung to me. It was not only her passionate desire to recruit another soul for her organization. The fact that I was Russian made it very special for her. And when she learned that my close relative, my grandmother’s brother, was a close associate of Sergey Kirov and was repressed after Kirov’s assassination Grace was swept away: it was obvious for her that I could not be a “Stalinist.” “Her relatives took part in the revolution!” – she recommended me to her party comrades with awe in her eyes, even though grandfather Vasily was only 17 in 1917 and was only beginning his political life. And, to her mind, since I was not a “Stalinist” it meant I was… She was full of Trotsky’s quotes and did not make secret of this. At once she instructed me that the main mistake of my country was that we did not wait till the world revolution comes. This blue-eyed girl, wrapped in a Palestinian kerchief, with her soldiers’ boots on, did not experience anything even remotely close to what our grandfathers and fathers had gone through so that my generation could get free education and medical care, have childhood free of need and humiliation. She did not care at all about the real achievements of our socialism, far from perfect but quite real. For her it never existed in the first place, it was only a “bureaucratic dictatorship,” even though our country had solved most of the problems, which her comrades in the West are only hoping to solve… by their vocal cords. What if here there lies the secret of their nihilistic attitude to our country? How dared we to have solved those social problems on our own, without the help of their vocal cords, before they have solved them…?

Abroad I missed the language of Marxism. How often one can hear from ordinary people in the West words like “the dictatorship of the proletariat” or “internationalism”? So I stayed with these ?rots for quite some time until two things completely demoralized me. The first of them was the utter futility and senselessness of shouting their slogans--it was not enough for me just to “let my steam out” against Bill Clinton and Nato—and the quasi-religious expectation of the world revolution that would come and save us all, without us moving a finger to bring this revolution closer.

The second problem was that those young people did not want to know what life in my country, the Soviet Union, really was, because this knowledge did not fit in their own mental abstractions of my society. For them, the USSR was equal to, if not bigger evil than world capitalism. They would shut their ears when I told them that my grandfather Vasily Nikiforov, who “did” many years felling trees in a labor camp in the Urals and who in the end had settled there, who lost his family because his wife left him after he was declared an “enemy of the people”—that this grandpa Vasily never said a bad word about our country, about the Revolution or other communists. “We got burned by what we fought for” was his only reply to all questions about Stalin. There was not an ounce of anti-Sovietism in him, not a bit of bitterness or hatred toward the “system” or self-pity. Already politically rehabilitated, my grandfather remained the same committed Bolshevik-Leninist that he was all his life. But this was not what my Trotskyist friends wanted to hear.

A year passed before Grace and I met again at the Labor Day demonstration in Dublin. This time I marched together with my comrades from Sinn Fein, helping them to carry their banner. When Grace saw this she made a face: Sinn Fein was “not radical enough” for her. “ –You and they? How could you? Fie…” In her mind, the activists who work helping to solve every day problems of the working class people, the “nationalists” who defend their community are greatly inferior to the flaming revolutionaries like herself.

Yes, Sinn Fein is not an impeccable Marxist-Leninist party. It is a progressive organization who leads a struggle for national-liberation and eclectically combines in its ranks both bourgeois nationalists and genuine Marxists of the kind I rarely met even during my young years in the Soviet Union. These Marxists have no illusions whatsoever that their unity with the bourgeois nationalists is temporary and necessitated by the current tasks of national liberation. They know that the party will inevitably split in the future after their struggle for full national sovereignty will have succeeded and the struggle for a socialist republic will begin.

The difference between these Marxists and Grace’s religious worship of a mythic Revolution is that they are not waiting for this revolution as for manna, but daily prepare it and for it by working in the very midst of the people, helping ordinary men and women to fight for their rights within their routine existence, and doing this without any pseudo-revolutionary chic and élan. The difference between the “nationalists” from Sinn Fein--let us not forget the fundamental proposition of Marxism-Leninism about the progressive character of the nationalism of the oppressed nation--and the “internationalists” like Grace is that the former DO real work and not just MAKE SOUNDS and DAYDREAM. In truth, their internationalism is much deeper and effective than Trotskyists’ verbal manifestations of support for other peoples.

Eamonn McCann— a journalist from Derry and “the ideological leader of Irish Trotskyists”—is a rather remarkable personality worthy of a separate article. He is fiery speaker who captivates his listeners. I met him first time at the demonstration in front of the US embassy in Dublin during the bombings of Yugoslavia and he at once made impression on me. Only later, after I had heard Eamonn many times, I began to notice that he repeated practically same words again and again; that he used meeting on any occasion—say, in support of Palestinians—in order to attack “the insufficiently left” Sinn Fein, and that, above all, it was the very process of “struggle” that he liked the most rather than achieving the goal of this struggle, as if in that case there would be nothing to fight for. ( I could not help using inverted comas for “struggle”, because people like Eamonn never achieve anything real for the people. This, however, does not prevent them from living quite comfortably on their salary and royalties from their books.)

People like Eamonn and Grace do not change the world. This is why they are allowed to criticize freely and sharply…with words, without getting beaten up and arrested. Capitalism is not afraid of this kind of “religious revolutionaries.” It is the determined, stubborn, and inconspicuous Sinners that Capitalism is afraid of. This is why Capitalism needs Eamonns and Graces. It believes in the old truth: the enemy of my enemy is my friend.

“The main goal of this type of parties is the struggle against genuinely progressive forces, who present real danger for existing order, all their shortcomings notwithstanding”. This is the opinion of Gerard, an Irish Republican who knows Eamonn. “For most of their members, being a left “rebel” means just a step in their political schooling before they graduate into “respectable” bourgeois parties and a kind of politicians who are on top today. Some prominent examples of such careers are Peter Mandelson and John Reid from the British Labor Party, former communists who became colonial administrators and governors in Northern Ireland. Peter Mandelson is notorious not only for many corruption scandals around his name, but for being one of the architects of British neoliberalism and the “New Labor” of Tony Blair. British leftists are distinguished by their vocal anti-Americanism while remaining completely silent about the role of British imperialism in the world. They are ready to support every people in struggle for national liberation: from Palestinians to Eastern Timorese. Every one… except the Irish. When it comes to Ireland they become mute, or resort to the favorite thesis of British imperialism about the “equal guilt” of “these impossible sectarians” of the North.”

“True, in Ireland we have our own kind of these leftists”- says Gerard. “Take, for example, our Republican Dissidents. They are so obsessed with the idea of “harming Sinn Fein” that instead of a comradely dialogue about our disagreements they are ready to sabotage the peace process for the sake of doing us harm. They also love struggle for struggle’s sake. They have no strategy, no vision. Their line to continue armed struggle in this period of our struggle for national independence plays only into the hands of the oppressor-enemy. Judging from their words and actions, their main enemy is no longer British imperialism but us, the supporters of peace process. As they are screaming that we have “sold out” to the British, their own activists confess their guilt in courts, which contradicts the very spirit of the Republican movement, because he who fights for national and social liberation cannot be guilty before his oppressor.”

Incidentally, there is information that the Dissidents, those “flaming and principled revolutionaries,” have been negotiating with the British full surrender of their arms and dismantling their organization in exchange for amnesty and the liberation of their leader. So much for “flaming revolutionaries.”

…Allen, a friend of mine, is a former member of the Workers Party of Ireland that used to have strong positions here but eventually practically went to pieces. According to Allen, the reason for this was the CIA which bought the leadership of the party. He finds consolations in what’s been going in Cuba. His legs and arms are covered with tattoos of the leaders of Cuban Revolution. He turned his back on his own people. “Cuban Revolution is my revolution! Socialismo, or muerte!” – repeatedly exclaims this man who has no intention of dying for socialism. “I have long given up on everything here. Our people got so mired in sectarianism that they are good for nothing. Only the grave will cure them.”

Allen works in “the lair of capitalism” – a slot machines parlor, whose owner makes millions on the poor people’s addiction to gambling. He has no plans to organize his co-workers—he would fly out of that job at once if he tried. Yet he constantly complains about his boss and praises the ban on gambling in Cuba. Twice a year Allen travels to Cuba with money for a local hospital. He also receives medical treatment there. Over a year ago Allen “broke loose” from the Belfast Solidarity Group with Cuba and founded his own group. No one in Belfast knows why, because Allen did not tell anybody. He confessed to me as “a neutral person”: “In Belfast they are too pro-Republican. They presented the Cubans with the portrait of Bobby Sands and likened him to Che Guevara. How could they! Che was internationalist. Sands – Irish nationalist.” It goes without saying that Allen, who condemns “the hopeless sectarianism of Northern Irishmen,” is a Protestant, while Bobby Sands is a hero of Catholic Republicans.

Gerard comments on Allen’s words: “Che Guevara was proud of his Irish blood. His father was a passionate supporter of Irish independence. If Che were not killed by the CIA agents in Bolivia he would most certainly join us in Ireland in the 1970s. As to calling Bobby Sands just a nationalist, it shows that your acquaintance never read either Che or Bobby. Take, say, his famous poem “Rhythm of Time”. It tells of Bobby’s sympathy and great solidarity with the struggle of many nations – the Vietnamese, native North Americans… It is easy to sit and daydream about a revolution on the other side of the world while doing nothing to change things at home! The position of such people is a good illustration of what I just talked about. There was a group in England who supported the independence of Ireland. But its members accused us all the time in having “sold out.” Do you know what the leader of this group is doing nowadays? Her name is Foster. Today this lady receives a 50,000 pound salary for doing PR work for the US cartel Monsanto that manufactures genetically modified plants. No comments are needed, I believe.”

When finishing this article, I learned the news about the racists in Southern Belfast who forced Jamal Iweida, the leader of the Moslem community of Northern Ireland, and his family to leave their home in Finaghy. Eamonn McCann’s comrades will probably march next week in the streets of Belfast, demanding to put an end to racist attacks. While they will be marching, others, very different and anonymous people will help Jamal and his family to find home and will take measures to prevent this happening to them again…

Authorized translation by Vadim Stolz

http://left.ru/inter/sept/leftright.html

[Seven Stars]

Irish Republicanism was founded by a Protestant and some of the greatest Republicans were Protestants. One of the key points of the Republican policy document is separation between church and state. The idea that the troubles in Ireland are a religous conflict is just British propaganda.

[fernando]

Revolution not reigns of terror on innocent people it doesn't help get the support of the British public.


Why get the support of the British public? The British (read the English) are the enemy, we do not need their support!

[Xiao Banfa]

Irish nationalism doesn't need the support of Brit public, but it does need the support of it's own public. Southern Ireland doesn't want to become embroiled in some conflict. Most people don't support Sinn Feins' goals in N. Ireland- they're either sick of the whole saga, don't care or oppose the IRA ideologically. Omagh was a terrible fuck up- the Real IRA fucked the Republican cred up more.
I agree with a united Ireland, but it's too late- it wont work anymore.

[Anti-establishment]

Originally posted by Tino [email protected] 1 2005, 01:54 PM
I agree with a united Ireland, but it's too late- it wont work anymore.
People say that about Communism/Socialism/Anarchism.

[Anti-establishment]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26 2005, 10:12 AM
I am a supporter of the Pre-Free State IRA of Michael Collins and figures like Treacy and with squads like the twelve apostles. This army had the support of the people. I agree with the PIRA of 1969-1972, their main objective was to stop Protestants burning their homes and forcing evictions with support of the British. The Battle of the Bogside and of Ballymurphy are good reasons to support this reaction from catholics. Internment is also another reason, when you see footage of prisoners smearing their excrement on their cell walls to avoid beating from the guards you find yourself struck by this harsh realism of the situation. Bloody Sunday was another case for support.

However, by their actions after this including Bloody Friday, they lost their main support. I am very symathetic towards them but will not advocate their cause. The main reason I disagree with them is that they hate communism and Marxism because of the Original IRA after the '56-62 campaign. Goulding was leftist in ideas and the provos used this leftism to further the local support from the O's to the provos.
Thats balls, Internment and the Dirty protest are separated by over 5 years! Bloody Friday was not a loss of support, the IRA were still immensely popular, and the Hunger Strikes of 81 boosted that popularity even further.

The PIRA did not use leftism to gain support from the OIRA either, the people realised for themselves that the OIRA would not defend them against loyalist attacks for fear of being seen as sectarian. Faced with that choice it's no wonder they supported the PIRA, now the OIRA cling to a few hundred supporters.

[Redmau5]

They do not deal drugs no Republican group does.

Im a Republican, but statements like that are ridiculous.


The only group who holds the right to be called the IRA is the IRA under the leadership of the Continuity Army Council, otherwise known as the Continuity IRA.

:lol:

You mean the people who write "suppourt your local unit" on the walls of Beechmount ? The people whose biggest claim to fame is putting a bomb on a bus outside Suffolk road barracks ?

Wise up. The war is over in Ireland. The PIRA done the only thing they could. People, on all sides, will only support violence for so long.

[Seven Stars]

Your an complete fool if you believe Republicans deal drugs. While there are some people that will use the name of a Republican group they are not connected in anyway.

If you think the war is over you are no Republican.

[Eastside Revolt]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 27 2005, 04:15 AM
As leftists, we cannot be concerned over "nations". Our priority must be the international working class, wherever they are. The question should not be whether it's an Irish or UK flag that waves in Norther Ireland, it should be what would be best for the Irish worker.
What about occupied lands in Canada, are the Mowhawk worthy of support, to you?

I agree that the enitre working class is has a right to self determination, but we can't belittle all struggles that aren't communist first and foremost.

[marxist_socialist_aussie]

as someone who comes from a long line of irish republican supporters, I almost always find myself agreeing with the IRA. I believe in recent times I believe the movement has somewhat been hijacked by thugs (as some of the crimes etc. have shown) yet, I still agree witht he original message. Plus, my father is reasonable good friengs with Gerry Adams of Sinn Fein (think that is the right spelling). I know he compromises, but still a bloke with good aims.

[Xiao Banfa]

I reckon the IRA need to use their sniper cannons mounted from the stadium to help New Zealand beat the Wallabies at rugby.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 07:58 PM
I think we are using religion in the same way the capitalist used relgion, to split movements. Some are not supporting the IRA because of religion, while there is probally hate between both religious groups this doesn't mean both are fighting for religion.

This happens with the Palastinian liberation movements, many don't want to support groups because the media focus most on relgion.

Its up to the Communists to make a decision on which movements are primarily fighting Imperialism and Zionism like the PLFP, IRA etc and which are primarily fighting for relgious movements Jemiah Islamiah.

While some groups like the IRA may get their inspiration from religion, are they fighting for a Catholic republic? or a Irish Republic that incorporates the North?

Your'e a Philistine if you split movements based on religion, when they are primarily fighting against imperialism.

I think it is clear that the IRA was built to fight British Colonialism primarily. Today i dont have enough knowledge to comment on the current issue.


trust me man - offer such people im referring to jobs and you'll get this reply "job? wha? me? work? its just not me mate!" they dont want to work - they dont want to be educated

If this guy had of been talking about Black people, Muslims, or Latins you would all be having a cry.
That's exactly what I was on about in my last post. His position is obviously bigoted. The only reason most of the people on this board aren't up in arms about it is they don't quite comprehend how one group of white people can be prejudiced against another. They don't understand that chauvanism doesn't always have to do with skin color or gender.

Anyhow, I'd also like to take a step back from Fernando's position if I could. The English people are not the enemy. Their government and military are, as well as the violent elements of the unionist community in the Six Counties. I personally know a good many English people who are opposed to the occupation of NI; there are several on this board, in fact. But, in keeping with the overall sentiment of his post, Republicans don't need the support of the English public. It's nothing to do with them.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 10:57 PM
Your an complete fool if you believe Republicans deal drugs. While there are some people that will use the name of a Republican group they are not connected in anyway.

If you think the war is over you are no Republican.

No, you are the fool.

Members of the RIRA have been caught smuggling drugs from South America.

Jeze, and this fellow talks about British propaganda. :rolleyes:

[Anti-establishment]

THE RIRA IS NOT THE IRA! muppet.

[Seven Stars]

No members of the so called 'Real' IRA were caught with drugs, unless you are thinking about the Columbia 3 who were provisionals accused of training the FARC, the papers said they had drugs on them. You must have been reading the tabloids like the Daily Mirror ect.

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 1 2005, 12:09 PM

Revolution not reigns of terror on innocent people it doesn't help get the support of the British public.


Why get the support of the British public? The British (read the English) are the enemy, we do not need their support!
well Praxis, where are your cries of outrage at this? This is clearly a xenophobic, bigoted statement, unlike the one you pointed out.

THE RIRA IS NOT THE IRA! muppet.

Try reading before posting: -


Your an complete fool if you believe Republicans deal drugs.

The RIRA are 'republicans'.

Muppet.

Irish_Republican

Even if it wasn't the RIRA it was still members of an IRA splinter group who were caught red handed.

Then you get the IRA members arrested for training members of FARC, who fund their activities through the international drugs trade. So much for the former policy of knee-capping dealers.

By the way, i have never read a single article from the daily mail, but you on the other hand seam to have a good working knowledge of reactionary news papers, i guess that as a fan of reactionary organisations that is nothing we shouldn't have expected.

[Seven Stars]

No members of the Real IRA were caught with drugs, i challenge to prove otherwise. And the Columbia 3 were framed the evidence against them was proven to be false. They were judged to be innocent but about 10 months later it was overturned but the men escaped and their location is unknown.

I am a Republican therefore in the Republican Movement so I think I would know if there were members of the movement dealing drugs.

[symtoms_of_humanity]

But your opinion could be biased, becuase you are a meber of that party, and everyone tends to bend the truth

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 06:08 AM
No members of the Real IRA were caught with drugs, i challenge to prove otherwise. And the Columbia 3 were framed the evidence against them was proven to be false. They were judged to be innocent but about 10 months later it was overturned but the men escaped and their location is unknown.

I am a Republican therefore in the Republican Movement so I think I would know if there were members of the movement dealing drugs.
Yes, its all a conspiricy!!!!1!!111!

They were caught in the country, they were arrested, but despite their innocence they did a runner? Yes very likley. They were found guilty when the first result of the first trial was appealed.

Tell me, why would innocent men do a runner, when they have a chance to prove that they were being 'framed'? If you wanted to confirm your guilt, doing a runer is the most efficient method of doing so.

You obviously haven't thought this through. Your judgement is so clouded by your own bias, its untrue.

But like I said, it is irrelevant which splinter group they were in, one of them was a member of Sinn Fein, and the other two were confirmed members of the IRA.

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 07:33 AM
Tell me, why would innocent men do a runner, when they have a chance to prove that they were being 'framed'? If you wanted to confirm your guilt, doing a runer is the most efficient method of doing so.
Would you feel confident about the Colombian legal system and their ability to prove your innocence? Right-wing corrupt government accusing three men of training left-wing guerillas. They were going to want to blame someone.

[Seven Stars]

Good job of providing evidence Enigma.

[The Grey Blur]

I am from Belfast and have a lot more authority than the rest of you. How can anyone support the Real IRA? What was the purpose of the Omagh bomb? How can killing babies be justifiable? When the provos attacked London and other English cities they did not target civilians, no matter how many Irish civilians were killed in Ireland. Sadly, civilians were killed sometimes. The IRA apoligised. The IRA did not call dead civilians 'collateral damage' as the British army did. Human lives are not collateral damage. The IRA were not terrorists. When there is an hostile army in your backyard you respond. The IRA undertook a guerilla war to attack.
Catholics were killed in their homes. My father was a Sinn Féin councillour. He was the only one of fifteen SF councillours not to have their homes targeted by loyalist paramilataries. I was ten at this time we lived in what was basically a bunker in the middle of the natonalist estate of Beechmount. I can remember the bulltproof glass, cameras and gates.
The peace process is taking a long time to come about because of bigots on both sides and the pandering SDLP. It is inevitable we will live in a united Ireland. It is only a matter of time, thank God.

'Tiocfaidh ár lá'

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by Rage Against The [email protected] 3 2005, 11:35 PM
I am from Belfast and have a lot more authority than the rest of you. How can anyone support the Real IRA? What was the purpose of the Omagh bomb? How can killing babies be justifiable? When the provos attacked London and other English cities they did not target civilians, no matter how many Irish civilians were killed in Ireland. Sadly, civilians were killed sometimes. The IRA apoligised. The IRA did not call dead civilians 'collateral damage' as the British army did. Human lives are not collateral damage. The IRA were not terrorists. When there is an hostile army in your backyard you respond. The IRA undertook a guerilla war to attack.
Catholics were killed in their homes. My father was a Sinn Féin councillour. He was the only one of fifteen SF councillours not to have their homes targeted by loyalist paramilataries. I was ten at this time we lived in what was basically a bunker in the middle of the natonalist estate of Beechmount. I can remember the bulltproof glass, cameras and gates.
The peace process is taking a long time to come about because of bigots on both sides and the pandering SDLP. It is inevitable we will live in a united Ireland. It is only a matter of time, thank God.

'Tiocfaidh ár lá'
I am from West Belfast and I defend the IRA's actions, but they were terrorists, because they used terror to achieve their means. Calling a group "terrorists" does not discredit them in my opinion, it simply describes the type of tactics they use.

When the IRA bombed Guildford and Birmingham, it was because they were places in which off-duty soldiers drank. Warnings were also given, as was the case with every IRA bomb.

I care little for Sinn Fein, most of them only seem concerned with holiday homes and making a name for themselves.

[The Grey Blur]

Where in West Belfast? And wtf do you mean they're concerned with buying holiday homes?

[Seven Stars]

Provisional Sinn Fein lost all claims to the name 'Sinn Fein' in 1986 when they entered onto the constitutional path; they are now a reformist party, wanting to change the system from within. They don't realize when you go into change the system, the system ends up changing you. They are no longer a revolutionary republican organization, they are now just a reformist nationialist party, very much like the SDLP. The only ones who can righfully claim to be the republican movement are Republican Sinn Fein and the Continuity IRA.

[praxis1966]

well Praxis, where are your cries of outrage at this? This is clearly a xenophobic, bigoted statement, unlike the one you pointed out.
Perhaps if you had bothered to read the second paragraph of my last post you would know that I had already addressed and disagreed with that as well. As far as the example of bigotry I pointed out earlier, well, you're wrong. Slice it any way you want, but you're still wrong.

[Anti-establishment]

Originally posted by [email protected] 3 2005, 07:33 AM
Tell me, why would innocent men do a runner, when they have a chance to prove that they were being 'framed'?
Maybe because Colombia's judicial system isn't worth shite.

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by Rage Against The [email protected] 4 2005, 01:12 AM
Where in West Belfast? And wtf do you mean they're concerned with buying holiday homes?
Well I live in the lower Falls. Did you not read about Sinn Fein's finance minister ? Bought a £1.5 million holiday home in Donegal. So how exactly would he have financed that ?

Sinn Fein do fuck all for "their" community, and still get paid bucket loads. Then they have the cheek to send people round doors asking people have they voted Sinn Fein.

I know I won't be voting for them anyway.

[The Grey Blur]

:lol: Where are you getting that from?
BTW - How do they have a 'nerve' canvassing for votes when they are the majority party in West Belfast?
P.S Name the estate or street you live in? "Lower Falls" is pretty general.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by Anti-establishment+Jul 4 2005, 09:34 AM--> (Anti-establishment @ Jul 4 2005, 09:34 AM)
[email protected] 3 2005, 07:33 AM
Tell me, why would innocent men do a runner, when they have a chance to prove that they were being 'framed'?
Maybe because Colombia's judicial system isn't worth shite. [/b]
No doubt. Columbia probably has one of the most human rights abusive governments in the Western Hemisphere. Fifteen or twenty years ago I would have argued El Salvador or Peru, but these days Columbia has to be the worst. Put in the same position, I would have run also.

On a lighter note, I love it that so many repubulicans have joined lately. Finally, I'll have some fucking backup around here. Welcome all.

[Trissy]

Who agrees with the IRA and who is against it, support your opinions
I am against the IRA but then I'm not especially pro-British. LSD has expressed a very similar point of view to my own although I'll try and support my view by commenting on what has already been said.


The majority of people in Northern Ireland WANT to be part of Britain

The let them move to Britain, Ireland should be one unified country
Yes but couldn't it equally be argued that people wanting a united Ireland could just move to the Republic? What makes one unified country better than two united countries? Communism requires the removal of all borders so that there are no such things as countries. Countries are artificial creations and as such they are far from necessary and result in needless conflict. Some people seem to support the idea of physical borders over artificial borders but this does not solve any problems. Ireland would be a country and so would Britain and oddly enough the whole of Africa. Would this solve poverty, war and injustice? I'm not that confident that it would. Things cannot be solved by simply retreating behind our physical borders and having strained relations with the world outside of them.


I just think the peace talks are getting no where, and that Ireland should be owned by the Irish, I realise there is a huge religious war, but many IRA just want the British out, and I agree boarders are ludicrous, but there needs to be a start
Just because peace talks are difficult doesn't mean that they should be abandoned in favour of acts of physical aggression no matter how justified they may appear. Also it may appear to be a start if you remove one boarder but it is merely an illusion. Communism can only ever be achieved if you remove all boarders, not just some...it is an all or nothing situation. One large capitalist country is not in any way better than two smaller capitalist countries.

Also why do you say owned? The prevailing left-wing mindset is that land is not owned by any one particular group or another and taken to its logical conclusion Communism would mean that people should be free to roam wherever since there would be no ‘owners’ to object to what they saw as trespass. It’s crazy for the left to think of a united Ireland being any more reasonable then a united Europe especially if people honestly believe in a right to own a particular piece of land rather than a universal right to access all land. It’s all summed up simply in the old saying ‘you’re born with nothing and you die with nothing’.


Irish and British will never work together, so just let the Irish have it, the way its supposed to be, then work from there
What do you mean by 'the way its supposed to be'? It sounds a rather confusing notion. Who says it's supposed to be one way rather than another? If this is supposedly not a religious thing than it cannot be God, and that leaves only man. I have yet to see an argument by either side that shows they have the sole right to Northern Ireland. Letting the Irish have ‘it’ (as you put it) is against the wishes of a significant proportion of Northern Ireland who are Protestants and/or pro-British and so the situation will never be solved simply by transferring authority to the Irish and telling all who oppose it to leave.


Scotland won its independence from Britain by fighting
Did they? I don't recall the Scottish either being independent or gaining their political power through attacking British interests in their country :huh: The Scottish have a parliament of their own which they gained through peaceful devolution of power after a successful referendum, but they are still part of Britain as such. Under the Good Friday agreement Northern Ireland also gained some devolved power but that wasn't gained through fighting but rather an agreement to take part in peaceful negotiations. Is the deadlock that there is now worse than the conflict of the past? I don't think so purely because people aren't dying in the crossfire.


Many Catholics died to give you the rights you have now, be more grateful.
The question shouldn't be 'how many Catholics/Protestants have died?', it should be 'how many innocent people have died?'. Also progress against intolerance does not necessarily require violence. Freedom from intolerance can be gained peacefully through a political path. Black people and gay people didn't need to kill people in order to make progress against institutionalised intolerance and repression. In my own humble opinion a long road is preferable to a short, bloody and volatile one.


I take your point, but the fact is eliminating corporate and parochial dictatorship are concerns which are secondary until Ireland has full autonomy within it's borders (borders which are not artificial but physical in this case). The fact is, the right of the people to self-determination should and must be absolute. It's actually kind of funny, you know. People like you will scream until they're blue in the face about British, American, and Israeli tyranny in the Middle East, and then turn around and argue in defense of tyranny and exploitation elsewhere. In this case it happens to be Ireland.
But physical borders are not any better than artificial ones. There remains the fact that a significant proportion of Northern Ireland want to remain united with the British. Why should the Republic have the right to determine how these people live?

Also the people of Northern Ireland can choose their political representatives unlike many of situations in the Middle East where they either have no representatives or their choice is extremely limited. Hence it is not exactly a tyranny.


It is essential that the Irish people have a right to self-determination; if they choose a socialist state it should be on their own terms
The feelings of people in the Republic or in England should not be taken into consideration because neither side has a right to rule over a significant proportion of people who do not desire to be ruled by them. Some people don't want to be Irish and some don't want to be British...you cannot say that a difficult situation will be solved by simply handing everything over to the Irish. Any permanent peace, if it comes, will come through peaceful discussions about current boarders and/or power sharing.


I see where you're coming from but the people of Ireland should be free along with all other people, in order for Irish to believe they can work Autonomously I think they must have their own country, then once that occurs they can then start to see past the boarders, but until the Brits are out, they will never see that
But why should they need 'their own country' in order to see that Capitalism is exploiting them? If they are blind to this then may I be so bold as to say they have made themselves blind by their blind and often visceral hatred of the enemy? It sounds like a convenient excuse to blame an acceptance of Capitalism in the Republic solely on the fact that they want to have one single type Capitalism throughout the land before they seek to fight against it. Capitalist exploitation is exploitation regardless of who reaps the benefits of it...all exploitation is to be opposed and it doesn't have to be done in any particular order. If people opened their eyes and let the dust settle then they'd find that all that has happened is that time and innocent lives have been wasted under the watchful eyes of the ruling classes. It is not a question of who is the Master, but a question of why there needs to be a Master at all...


The idea that the troubles in Ireland are a religious conflict is just British propaganda.
The idea that it is a merely religious conflict perhaps. But then what is propaganda? A lot of the time propaganda is just lies, untruths and half truths that an opponent says which our side neither started, propagated nor approves of. All groups throughout history have used propaganda at some point or another...

[bolshevik butcher]

The ira is a religous terrorist organisation. Conolley is a man i admire, however the ira today is nothing like a conolleyite oragnasation. Killing civillians is not admirable.

[praxis1966]

How many times do people like you have to be told that it's nothing to do with religion? There are a good number of protestants, prominant ones I might add, who were/are members of the IRA. Besides, the last time the IRA participated in anything which could be remotely characterized as terrorist was over 30 years ago, actions for which they have apologized. This is, not surprisingly, much more than I can say for the British government or the paras on the other side of the issue.

Does anyone else find it odd that the of the most vocal opposition to the IRA and other republican organizations comes from outside Ireland? If it's any indication, with the exception of one person, all the other naysayers in this thread are from countries other than Ireland or England. Whales, Scottland, America, Canada... It must be pretty easy to be so morally superior when you have absolutely no stake in the matter.


Yes but couldn't it equally be argued that people wanting a united Ireland could just move to the Republic?
Ummm, no. Being that the British were the invading imperial force, Northern Ireland is still in the hands of the thieves. The Irish there are under no obligation to leave what is legitimately their homeland, unlike their British landlords. I'm sorry, after reading this statement I can't possibly take anything you say seriously.

[werewolf]

I am rather moderate toward the IRA. I believe in what they are fighting for, however I disagree with the terrorist tactics. During the original fight to make Ireland free, I can see the terrorist attacks being justified, however Northern Ireland is a different fight. It needs to be diplomatic.

[Trissy]

How many times do people like you have to be told that it's nothing to do with religion? There are a good number of protestants, prominant ones I might add, who were/are members of the IRA
Erm...when exactly did anybody deny that that was possible? Just because one side isn't 100% Catholic and the other 100% Protestant doesn't mean that religion isn't one of the factors in this conflict. A small percentage of Jews aren't Zionists and support the Palestinian's fight for their own state but that still doesn't mean that religion isn't a factor in that conflict. Neither of these are solely religious conflicts but to state that religion plays no factor at all in Northern Ireland involves a much heavier burden of proof.


Does anyone else find it odd that the of the most vocal opposition to the IRA and other republican organizations comes from outside Ireland?
Perhaps but then again many supporters of the IRA and republican organisations also come from outside Ireland. Quite a few Americans harp on about their Irish roots and support them solely because they believe that they are historically bound to one another.


Ummm, no. Being that the British were the invading imperial force, Northern Ireland is still in the hands of the thieves. The Irish there are under no obligation to leave what is legitimately their homeland, unlike their British landlords
Ha...you talk like you actually believe that you (or in fact any of us) are in a fit position to judge objectively what legitimacy is. In the past legality, rationality and authenticity were notions that were dependant on God, in our less religious age we're left to argue on the notion that they are manmade ideas and as such have no objectivity in them at all. I have yet to see you provide an objective argument that shows how anybody has a right to own land at all, let alone show us how the mere fact that the act of a pregnant woman giving birth empowers her child with rights over the land that just happens to be under her feet at the time. What an odd notion that would be...a woman could give birth in one spot and a child would be English and entitled to live in England, whereas a few steps to the left would mean that child was Welsh and entitled to live in Wales with the benefits that go with that right. Nationality and ideas that are bound up with it (such as rights) are purely manmade concepts that arose out of convention and power. Talk of rights outside of power and convention is to trick oneself into believing in some kind of mysticism.

So in what sense does anybody hold a legitimate right to land over anybody else? Do you actually know or were you relying on some religious notion of justice? Perhaps you believe in some other abstract version of justice...perhaps you're a Platonist? If not then it will be interesting to see your arguments.

As I stated in my original post you have yet to show how physical borders are superior to artificial ones. Britain used to be a group of smaller kingdoms and which each claimed to be legitimate, and through history it has developed into being three nations which claim to be legitimate. If nations aren't established through conventions and power then what is stopping the people of Wessex demanding the British leave? What makes a united Ireland necessarily better then when Ireland was comprised of smaller kingdoms? What I find odd is that you have picked one period of history where Ireland was united and then you have bestowed it with the title 'legitimate' at the expense of all that has followed (and perhaps all that went before) as if your decision somehow reflects the state of affairs in an objective manner. It seems to me to be either an arbitrary objective choice (and hence not especially desirable) or a subjective choice which has a troubled relationship with the politics of the left. Nations are manmade and there borders change over time with the changes to the balance of power...nations are born, they grow and then they die...but ultimately they are never more than a fictional creation for pleasing man. Why should we worry about nations when the true enemy is the ruling class?

A Communist society would have no need for nations, and to be fair they're not even that necessary in a Socialist society. So another point I made to a comment by symtoms_of_humanity was why do Irish leftists need to support the IRA before such societies can be achieved? What makes supporting them a necessary step towards such goals? I was always of the opinion that there are many ways to skin a cat as the saying goes.


I'm sorry, after reading this statement I can't possibly take anything you say seriously.
Well more fool you then because I have actually thought through my political and philosophical views on this issue and tried to resolve the problems that I found in them. To be fair I still question my views daily and attempt to do so...

You on the other hand seem to have either not done so or you have and just not provided a complete explanation of yourself here. Either way I'm still prepared to debate this because I don't close my mind to the views of others as easily and quickly as you seem to have done to me.

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by Rage Against The [email protected] 4 2005, 06:46 PM
:lol: Where are you getting that from?
BTW - How do they have a 'nerve' canvassing for votes when they are the majority party in West Belfast?
P.S Name the estate or street you live in? "Lower Falls" is pretty general.
So you deny that Sinn Fein have gotten rich whilst doing fuck all ?

Oh yeah, do you want me to post my telephone number over the site as well ? Im from Clonard.

And they clearly have a "nerve". Sending Provies who have to much time on their hands round people's doors asking "have you voted?" If they were so popular why would they have to do this ?

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 08:01 AM

well Praxis, where are your cries of outrage at this? This is clearly a xenophobic, bigoted statement, unlike the one you pointed out.
Perhaps if you had bothered to read the second paragraph of my last post you would know that I had already addressed and disagreed with that as well. As far as the example of bigotry I pointed out earlier, well, you're wrong. Slice it any way you want, but you're still wrong.
So you did, my a apologies.

Praxis I'm going to let you into a little secret: you are saying that one subjective opinion holds more value than another subjective opinion. This is a logical fallacy, there is no 'wrong'.

[symtoms_of_humanity]

[QUOTE]Did they? I don't recall the Scottish either being independent or gaining their political power through attacking British interests in their country The Scottish have a parliament of their own which they gained through peaceful devolution of power after a successful referendum, but they are still part of Britain as such. Under the Good Friday agreement Northern Ireland also gained some devolved power but that wasn't gained through fighting but rather an agreement to take part in peaceful negotiations. Is the deadlock that there is now worse than the conflict of the past? I don't think so purely because people aren't dying in the crossfire.


Yes they did, it was many years ago in the medival ages, you know the movie Braveheart, its based on a true story

[pastradamus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 10:16 PM
Who agrees with the IRA and who is against it, support your opinions. I am for the IRA becuase the Irish should have their country back, and the Brits. should get out, I am infact Irish, but I don't care about the religious war, to me its a war for Irish freedom. I agree more with the RIRA becuase the only way to get the Brits. to listen is with force, the peace talks of the PIRA have gotten them no where.
ARGGGGGHHHH! I just heard A buzzing in my ears when I read that!

ITS NOT THAT SIMPLE COMRADE. NOT BY MILES.

Im just gonna nip this one in the bud for Everybody here.

There are a few Republican groups in Ireland Connected with the fight for the north.

1)The PIRA (provisional Irish republican Army)

2)The RIRA (Real Irish Republican Army)

3)The CIRA (Continuity Irish Republican Army)

4)The INLA (Irish National Liberation Army)


1) The PIRA Was the orignal & first IRA in the North In modern times (since the 60's) They Had an estimated 10,000 members at their height. They are responsible for carrying out thousands of bombings & killing over 1000 people (including an assassination attempt on Thatchers Cabinet).
Sinn Féin is the political wing of the PIRA & up until a few months ago The PIRA withdrew its ceasefire agreement which was created in the good friday agreement Signed in 1995. This was due to accusations (which turned out to be true) that the IRA Carried out a Bank Heist in Belfast which earned them over £40m. This group is the main Republican Group in Northern Ireland & South of the border.

2) The RIRA which is responsible For the Death Of 28 people in the omagh bombing. Broke away from The PIRA as a few hardliners who refused to accept the good friday agreement.

3) The CIRA is a militant group probably numbering about 200 members. They are somewhat connected with the RIRA & refuse to accept the good friday agreement. They Mainly operate In the Munster Area of the South.

4) The INLA are completely Different to the IRA. They have been linked with hundreads of incidents in the Drug trade & are known for their total extremism toward loyalists & even protestants. Their political wing The IRSP (Irish Republican Socialist Party) have yet to win a seat in government.


Now ComesReligion issue.

Its not about religion with the IRA. Some of the greatest Irish Rebels were protestants e.g Wolfe Tone, Charles Stuart Parnell, Daniel O'Connell.
Religious tensions Broke out after the 1869 Fenian Rebellion in Ireland when Members of the protestant Loyalist/Unionist Orange order appealed to religous Bigotry as a means of creating tension Between the two groups. Even today we can see that people are more willing to fight when religion comes into the equation (eg.suicide bombers).


PA.

[Seven Stars]

For more info on the Continuity IRA or any other Republican group, go here: http://www.upthera.net

[pastradamus]

Good to See a strong Irish presence on the board once again.

[pastradamus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 5 2005, 03:40 PM
And they clearly have a "nerve". Sending Provies who have to much time on their hands round people's doors asking "have you voted?" If they were so popular why would they have to do this ?
If you had an understanding of what its like to live everyday bigotry From loyalists you would see these 'provies' as being on your side. Thats why all the catholic ghettos in the north always vote sinn féin.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 27 2005, 04:15 AM

The let them move to Britan, Ireland should be one unified country

The argument that Ireland "should" be unified is the same argument for saying that the British Isles "should" be unified ...namely it isn't one.

Yeah, Ireland was arbitrarily and unfairly divided up, but that's what countries are. The boundries of pretty much every country on earth are equally ludicrous. Ireland was split up based on religious lines which, honestly, makes about as much sense as basing it on "cultural" or "national" ones.

As leftists, we cannot be concerned over "nations". Our priority must be the international working class, wherever they are. The question should not be whether it's an Irish or UK flag that waves in Norther Ireland, it should be what would be best for the Irish worker.

And honestly, can any of you say that an IRA "victory" would really help them?

The IRA is a reactionary nationalist organization fighting a religious war, their fight is most definitely not ours.
Allow me to be up front about my allegience. I support the IRSP, I do not support the IRA. I would agree with many that the actions of armed republicans, while justified in many ways, in the end contributed to (but did not create) a sectarian situation.

The war is really not about national boundaries. PSF's capitulation is proof of that.

The real issue was about what methods were used by the British colonials to maintain their foothold in Ireland, which included the systematic disenfranchisement of Catholic voters, the illegality and suppresion of Irish speaking people, pogroms and massacres.

The fact is, an IRA 'victory' would remove the most brutal aspects of oppression there, such as checkpoints, the occupation of our sports fields, the shooting and gassing of our children and the sectarian attacks on our community which have actually increased.

But this isn't even remotely in the cards. The provisionals have signed up to an agreement that is basically a watered down set of demands from the civil rights era.

The IRA is by far not a religious reactionary organisation. It has Protestant martyrs (as do the INLA) and most of the time targetted the security forces, not civilians, and not especially protestants at that.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2005, 03:33 PM
4) The INLA are completely Different to the IRA. They have been linked with hundreads of incidents in the Drug trade & are known for their total extremism toward loyalists & even protestants. Their political wing The IRSP (Irish Republican Socialist Party) have yet to win a seat in government.
For starters, the INLA has never, as an organisation been involved in the drug trade. Those volunteers who have in the past were executed, especially during the leadership of Dominic McGlinchey, my namesake.

The INLA's last statement, in fact, stated that any criminals caught using the name of the INLA as a cover for their activities would be executed. The INLA has executed people caught in the drug trade, including their own members.

There are more proven instances of the Gardai, the Loyalists and the PIRA dealing drugs than members or former members of the IRSM, yet the label is often attached to us. It's also an interesting irony that those who voice this criticism the most are often the same people who use recreational drugs, ie the Trendy Left. I've witnessed this myself.

Although we have often hit the Loyalists harder than any other republican grouping, we are also the first to talk to them. We recently sat down with representatives of the PUP to discuss easing sectarian tensions during the marching season.

Members of the IRSP have won seats, but do not see this as a good tactic at all times. We have always, since our inception, regarding electoralism as just one tactic to be used.

[Sir Aunty Christ]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2005, 07:30 PM
The fact is, an IRA 'victory' would remove the most brutal aspects of oppression there, such as checkpoints, the occupation of our sports fields, the shooting and gassing of our children and the sectarian attacks on our community which have actually increased.
The last checkpoint I saw was in 1995. But then again I live north of Belfast, maybe things are different closer to the border.

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 4 2005, 11:02 PM
The ira is a religous terrorist organisation.
That isn't true. The IRA is a non-sectarian, secular organisation. As for the other parts, well terms like "terrorist" are thrown around far too much for my liking.

[Conghaileach]

Originally posted by [email protected] 9 2005, 04:33 PM
Sinn Féin is the political wing of the PIRA & up until a few months ago The PIRA withdrew its ceasefire agreement which was created in the good friday agreement Signed in 1995.
The Good Friday Agreement was signed in 1998. The IRA hasn't made any attacks on the British since then, or for some time before.




This was due to accusations (which turned out to be true) that the IRA Carried out a Bank Heist in Belfast which earned them over £40m.
The Northern Bank robbery, in which £26.5 million was taken, has yet to be connected to the IRA. In fact, the only real progress made in the case was when an amount of money was found in a police club up near Ballymena, which has led many to suggest that the robbery was set up to discredit the IRA, and thus Sinn Féin, similar to the Littlejohn gang that operated in the 70s. The Littlejohn gang was run by British intelligence but the robberies were blamed on the IRA.



The INLA are completely Different to the IRA. They have been linked with hundreads of incidents in the Drug trade
I'm not even going to touch that one.



are known for their total extremism toward loyalists & even protestants.
That's something of a brash comment. The IRSP in Derry recently met with PUP to discuss the problem of sectarian attacks in the city. The part has also been active in cross-community forums for a number of years now.



Their political wing The IRSP (Irish Republican Socialist Party) have yet to win a seat in government.
The IRSP has not stood for election in quite a few years. They had two councillors elected to Belfast City Council in 1982.




Its not about religion with the IRA. Some of the greatest Irish Rebels were protestants e.g Wolfe Tone, Charles Stuart Parnell, Daniel O'Connell.
Daniel O'Connell was a middle-class Catholic nationalist who turned his back on the Republicans of the day (many of whom, like Thomas Davis, were Protestant) in favour of his narrow class-based agenda.

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by pastradamus+Jul 9 2005, 04:36 PM--> (pastradamus @ Jul 9 2005, 04:36 PM)
[email protected] 5 2005, 03:40 PM
And they clearly have a "nerve". Sending Provies who have to much time on their hands round people's doors asking "have you voted?" If they were so popular why would they have to do this ?
If you had an understanding of what its like to live everyday bigotry From loyalists you would see these 'provies' as being on your side. Thats why all the catholic ghettos in the north always vote sinn féin. [/b]
If I had an understanding ? I am from a fucking catholic ghetto, Clonard. So don't talk down to me.

[pastradamus]

The Northern Bank robbery, in which £26.5 million was taken, has yet to be connected to the IRA. In fact, the only real progress made in the case was when an amount of money was found in a police club up near Ballymena, which has led many to suggest that the robbery was set up to discredit the IRA, and thus Sinn Féin, similar to the Littlejohn gang that operated in the 70s. The Littlejohn gang was run by British intelligence but the robberies were blamed on the IRA

£26.5m IN NORTHERN BANK NOTES,A substantial amount of Euro's & dollars were also included in the Heist.

has yet to be connected to the IRA? LMAO!
Im living in Cork...Enough said....Lots of Northern Bank notes there, one Sinn Fein member was found with hundreads of thousands of these notes in his house... now your going to tell me he found these in a taxi cab. A Personal friend of mine was found burning the notes out his backyard when police arrived so dont try to educate me on the matter.

& yes the INLA's manifeso makes it a seperate organisation, thats not to say there are no personal links between members of both.


The IRSP has not stood for election in quite a few years. They had two councillors elected to Belfast City Council in 1982.

The IRSP are still pretty active. I was talking about NIMP's not local level,my opologies for the unclarity.


That's something of a brash comment. The IRSP in Derry recently met with PUP to discuss the problem of sectarian attacks in the city. The part has also been active in cross-community forums for a number of years now.

Please... the IRSP present a rosey,niceguy image & always have. Show me PROOF that their militant wing the INLA are compleatly uninvolved in the Drug Trade.

O'Connell never said that he was a communist/leftist.

I would agree with the IRSP manifesto & the early years of their foundation & have an immense amount of respect for some of its members, But their Image remaines somewhat tarnished by a short-sighted military wing.

[pastradamus]

Let Me make CLEAR my own Stand-point with the War.

Im a supporter & have strong ties with the IRA & ETA(Euskadi Fatherland & seperatist movement).

Those groups that split for the IRA's cause are Destroying & Damaging Any possibility of a unified 32 county Eire. The Peacefull road chosen by the provo's was a way of politically routing Brittish Influence from the north. But this Failed as a result of a propaganda war waged by the media & by the Brittish & Irish governments & by testing our Patience to the limit.

In the late 60s, 70's & 80's the Brittish government trembeled and a state of Crisis was upon Stormont.... WHO ELSE CAN SAY THIS OUT OF ALL THE OTHER GROUPS IN THE NORTH? Thats the question I pose to all people of this site who Think The IRSM has achieved anything special.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2005, 12:38 PM
Daniel O'Connell was a middle-class Catholic nationalist who turned his back on the Republicans of the day (many of whom, like Thomas Davis, were Protestant) in favour of his narrow class-based agenda.
In fact, he actively played a role in suppressing the rising of Emmett's.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2005, 08:56 PM
Please... the IRSP present a rosey,niceguy image & always have. Show me PROOF that their militant wing the INLA are compleatly uninvolved in the Drug Trade.

You can't prove a negative . . . :huh:

There's no proof the INLA are involved in drugs.

Not even any substantial evidence.

And the evidence that exists is to the contrary.



I would agree with the IRSP manifesto & the early years of their foundation & have an immense amount of respect for some of its members, But their Image remaines somewhat tarnished by a short-sighted military wing.

Sure, their image is bad . . . so is the image of everyone movement that has opposed capitalism in arms.

The facts are that the INLA actually killed less civilians, has less criminality and less fueds than any other paramilitary in the o6c. Of course that doesn't matter to the media, etc. It's in their interest to present another image, for obvious reasons.

[pastradamus]

I'll Put it like this...

I Respect the IRSM. You Sound like a genuine Person in terms of leftist beliefs.

Why would the Media make such a big deal about a small movement in the north when the presence of a much bigger IRA always overshadowed it?

I understand the bastards always try to piss on progressiveness for the working class in any militant circumstance.

[Des]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2005, 12:40 PM
I am from a fucking catholic ghetto, Clonard.
2 minute dander from myself...

[Hiero]

Are there Sien Fienn members or other republican members here?

[pastradamus]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 01:57 PM
Are there Sien Fienn members or other republican members here?
:ph34r: yep

[Batman]

Why would the Media make such a big deal about a small movement in the north when the presence of a much bigger IRA always overshadowed it?

1) Because it makes a good story.

2) Because at the time of the 1969 split, the Officials were in the majority. (The IRSM broke away from the ORM)

3) The IRSM are a Revolutionary Marxist movement. Therefore they are more a threat to the status quo than the PIRA etc

4) The IRSM might have been small, but it was effective and at times ruthless.

5) The security forces could nor break the IRSM over thirty years. The movement was attacked by the State, counter-revolutionaries, enemies of the working class, the PIRA, OIRA, Loyalists, Brit Army and IPLO.

[Rockfan]

What are the shin finns policies out side of irish indipendence??

[Sir Aunty Christ]

A reason to celebrate:

IRA statement (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4724599.stm)

Now we can move on.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Sir Aunty [email protected] 28 2005, 12:03 PM
A reason to celebrate:

IRA statement (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4724599.stm)

Now we can move on.
Now we can celebrate that our comrades gave their lives for a sellout? :o

[Sir Aunty Christ]

Originally posted by OglachMcGlinchey+Jul 28 2005, 02:29 PM--> (OglachMcGlinchey @ Jul 28 2005, 02:29 PM)
Sir Aunty [email protected] 28 2005, 12:03 PM
A reason to celebrate:

IRA statement (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4724599.stm)

Now we can move on.
Now we can celebrate that our comrades gave their lives for a sellout? :o [/b]
Now we can move on to focussing on the problem of how to build Socialism in Ireland. Be honest, armed struggle wasn't really getting Republicans anywhere and Sinn Fein may be down as an Extreme Left party but they're getting ever closer to the Establishment so what would have changed? Apart from the absence of the border.

[redmafiosi]

The sinn fein allready has secured the last nail on it's own coffin. Just now I saw it on the T.V. The IRA instructed all it's units to dump it's arms. It's hard to believe. After all that sinn fein scored a big zero. It's the end of IRA.

[Des]

more chance of getting the united ireland via sinn fein and the ira etc

[Anti-establishment]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 01:57 PM
Are there Sien Fienn members or other republican members here?
I'm from the l/falls, off the grovenor road, but im not a member of SF.

[coda]

<<The sinn fein allready has secured the last nail on it&#39;s own coffin. Just now I saw it on the T.V. The IRA instructed all it&#39;s units to dump it&#39;s arms. It&#39;s hard to believe. After all that sinn fein scored a big zero. It&#39;s the end of IRA.>>


Dump their arms into the R/CIRA&#39;s lap like they&#39;ve done before. It&#39;s never the End as long as British rule exists. This is all the negotiations of the army council, those that are getting seats in the goverment. The volunteers are a different story.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 08:57 AM
Are there Sien Fienn members or other republican members here?
I&#39;m a member of Cairde Sinn Fein, the North American daughter organization of Sinn Fein.

[вор в законе]

Regarding the I.R.A.


This group is a radical terrorist group formed in 1969 as clandestine armed wing of Sinn Fein, a legal political movement dedicated to removing British forces from Northern Ireland and unifying Ireland. The organization has a Marxist orientation, and is organized into small, tightly knit cells under the leadership of the Army Council.

That was from http://www.ict.org.il/inter_ter/orgdet.cfm?orgid=34

Either way the I.R.A. was fighting against the British Imperialism and for that reason i can at least sympathise them,just like ETA.It is sad though that it is always the innocent people who must pay for the stupidity and aggression of their leaders.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 09:32 AM
The sinn fein allready has secured the last nail on it&#39;s own coffin. Just now I saw it on the T.V. The IRA instructed all it&#39;s units to dump it&#39;s arms. It&#39;s hard to believe. After all that sinn fein scored a big zero. It&#39;s the end of IRA.
On the contrary. The fight for a united and independent Ireland is moving forward. The Good Friday agreement registered that and opened the way for further advaces...as both Loyalists and London seem to realize, judging by their reluctance to fully implement it. This dynamic&#39;s reflected in both mass mobilizations and Sinn Fein&#39;s electoral successes. Meanwhile, Catholics are likely to soon be a majority in northern Ireland.

The disbanding of the IRA removes an excuse they were using to justify and distract attention from their foot-dragging. At a certain point in the negotiations in South Africa, the ANC had to make a similar move to disband its armed wing, whose continued existence served only to provide the apartheid regime with a similar excuse.

The Sinn Fein leadership is quite fond of parallels to the South African process and I&#39;m sure they&#39;re aware of that one.

Complete text of IRA statement on disarmament. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-nireland-ira-text,1,1674550.story?coll=sns-ap-world-headlines&ctrack=1&cset=true)

Reflects an accurate view of the current situation I think.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Severian+Jul 28 2005, 07:49 PM--> (Severian &#064; Jul 28 2005, 07:49 PM)
[email protected] 28 2005, 09:32 AM
The sinn fein allready has secured the last nail on it&#39;s own coffin. Just now I saw it on the T.V. The IRA instructed all it&#39;s units to dump it&#39;s arms. It&#39;s hard to believe. After all that sinn fein scored a big zero. It&#39;s the end of IRA.
On the contrary. The fight for a united and independent Ireland is moving forward. The Good Friday agreement registered that and opened the way for further advaces...as both Loyalists and London seem to realize, judging by their reluctance to fully implement it. This dynamic&#39;s reflected in both mass mobilizations and Sinn Fein&#39;s electoral successes. Meanwhile, Catholics are likely to soon be a majority in northern Ireland.

The disbanding of the IRA removes an excuse they were using to justify and distract attention from their foot-dragging. At a certain point in the negotiations in South Africa, the ANC had to make a similar move to disband its armed wing, whose continued existence served only to provide the apartheid regime with a similar excuse.

The Sinn Fein leadership is quite fond of parallels to the South African process and I&#39;m sure they&#39;re aware of that one.

Complete text of IRA statement on disarmament. (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/wire/sns-ap-nireland-ira-text,1,1674550.story?coll=sns-ap-world-headlines&ctrack=1&cset=true)

Reflects an accurate view of the current situation I think. [/b]
I&#39;m honestly not saying this just to start a fight, but there&#39;s no other way to say it: you couldn&#39;t be more wrong. I respect that you&#39;re well meaning, but I disagree almost completely, point for point. I&#39;ll explain why I say this.

The demoralisation caused by the Provos&#39; disintegration has basically turned aggression inward. Attacks against immigrants, homosexuals and &#39;the other side&#39; have dramatically increased. It&#39;s no coincidence that the &#39;homophobe capitol&#39; of Ireland is the city where the provos first worked out a detante and unofficial ceasefire with the Brits, Derry city.

Protestant Loyalists have reacted to the threat to their power by increasing attacks on Catholics. However Catholics remain twice as likely still to be unemployed, according to the most recent study. The gains by catholics towards equality is largely symbolic. The Unionist veto, which remains intact, guarantees this.

This agreement was designed to destroy the provisionals as a threat to British power in Ireland. It&#39;s done that, and now that the Provos are disbanded, we won&#39;t see an inch more of progress, not that there&#39;s been that much anyway.

Circumstances have changed to the point where armed struggle is of course not an option. Had perhaps republicans attempted to utilise the mass upsurge in anti-imperialist sentiment that formed around the hunger strikes, a mass movement could&#39;ve been formed. Perhaps if this avenue had been fully explored (as the IRSP then advocated), the energy of the massive, spontaneous demos and strikes could have been used to rid Ireland of the Brits and native capitalists. Sadly PSF chose to channel this protest into votes&#33;

This agreement keeps the masses as spectators, when at least the armed campaign involved them directly and indirectly on a much larger scale. Now we&#39;re just asked to support this or that agreement or emergency meeting, or this or that leader who can save us.

The number of catholics in the six counties will not alter its composition, either. The voting wards have always been drawn to effectively disenfranchise catholic voters. There&#39;s no basis for assuming this will change.

The &#39;excuse&#39; of the IRA is not an issue either. There was almost no IRA when the Loyalists launched their pogroms in 69. To justify emergency measures, including mass arrests of catholic civilians and interning them in WWII-style concentration camps Loyalists simply set off their own bomb and blamed it on the fenians. If history is any indication, they don&#39;t need an excuse, or they&#39;ll invent one&#33;

The political culture of norn iron hasn&#39;t really changed. The orange still chant &#39;no surrender&#39; and the catholics still fear the next pogrom.

In my opinion, this isn&#39;t a step backwards, so much as sideways.

[Hiero]

Originally posted by pastradamus+Jul 12 2005, 04:13 AM--> (pastradamus @ Jul 12 2005, 04:13 AM)
[email protected] 11 2005, 01:57 PM
Are there Sien Fienn members or other republican members here?
:ph34r: yep [/b]
What are you a member of?

[redstar2000]

These events remind me of a reflection made by, of all people, Isaac Asimov when discussing Assyrian oppression of the Babylonians.

"The Babylonians revolted over and over again," he said, "and the Assyrians ruthlessly crushed every revolt...except the last one."

Judging by history, the present defeat is but a temporary one...and the Irish in the "six counties" will rise again and again and again until the Union Jack is lowered for the final time.

Nor does this situation appear tractable to "peaceful solutions" even if they were well-meant...which the "Good Friday Agreement" obviously is not.

Whether some think that the people in Northern Ireland should peacefully submit to British rule or not, they are not going to do that.

At least they never have...for something on the order of the last eight centuries.

It is very difficult for me to see any reasonable chance for socialism or communism to even "get on the agenda" in Ireland (either part) until the Brits leave for good.

The reunification of Ireland seems to be one of those things that "must happen" before any real progress in the direction we want can begin to take place there.

Although it is unlikely that I will still be alive when the next rising occurs, I would support it if I were still around to do so.

I would urge those of you who will be around then to do likewise.

It is in our class interests to put a final end to this matter and move on.

Brits Out&#33;

http://www.websmileys.com/sm/cool/123.gif

[h&s]

It is very difficult for me to see any reasonable chance for socialism or communism to even "get on the agenda" in Ireland (either part) until the Brits leave for good.
Only where sectarians use British State presence as an excuse to do their best to suppress revolutionary thought.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by h&[email protected] 29 2005, 01:28 PM

It is very difficult for me to see any reasonable chance for socialism or communism to even "get on the agenda" in Ireland (either part) until the Brits leave for good.
Only where sectarians use British State presence as an excuse to do their best to suppress revolutionary thought.
It&#39;s weird that you would say that -- I certainly know that there are some Catholic bigots who are a problem (for example, Protestants are often harrassed in the Fountain area of Derry), but republicans have attempted to put a stop to this. It&#39;s the Brits who armed Protestant Loyalist death squads who went around randomly murdering any catholics they found. There is no republican/nationalist equivilent of the Orange Order or the Shankhill Butchers.

Republicanism has always been about uniting catholic, protestant, dissenter and breaking the connection with England. Obviously it hasn&#39;t succeeded yet, but to lay the claim of sectarianism at the feet of republicans doesn&#39;t make sense. Both the INLA and PIRA have Protestant martyrs, and I know several Protestants in RSF. It&#39;s only in the interest of the Brits to divide the Irish, which was their tactic in every colony.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 12:12 AM
The demoralisation caused by the Provos&#39; disintegration has basically turned aggression inward. Attacks against immigrants, homosexuals and &#39;the other side&#39; have dramatically increased.
Are you saying there are more attacks on the "other side" now than when the IRA was actively fighting?


Protestant Loyalists have reacted to the threat to their power by increasing attacks on Catholics.

So there is a new threat to their power? Or at least they think so. They seem to agree more with my assessment than yours, then.

Are you saying there are more attacks on Catholics than before the ceasefire?

I think it&#39;ll be harder for London to turn a blind eye to ongoing Loyalist terrorism without the possibility of distracting attention onto the (silent) guns of the IRA....


However Catholics remain twice as likely still to be unemployed, according to the most recent study. The gains by catholics towards equality is largely symbolic. The Unionist veto, which remains intact, guarantees this.

Not in dispute. The question is, will the Unionist veto remain intact forever?


It&#39;s done that, and now that the Provos are disbanded, we won&#39;t see an inch more of progress, not that there&#39;s been that much anyway.

Today&#39;s news is, the Brits are dismantling more of their military presence in South Armagh. That&#39;s at least an inch of progress right there...we&#39;ll see how well your prediction pans out in future.


Circumstances have changed to the point where armed struggle is of course not an option.

So it&#39;s difficult to see why the IRA shouldn&#39;t be disbanded, then, or why its continued existence would be a threat to British rule or would encourage progress.


This agreement keeps the masses as spectators, when at least the armed campaign involved them directly and indirectly on a much larger scale. Now we&#39;re just asked to support this or that agreement or emergency meeting, or this or that leader who can save us.

Seems to me there&#39;ve been more mass actions, at least during the early part of the agreement, than before. All the stuff around the "marching season" for example.

Sinn Fein has been overemphasizing the electoral side of things and underemphasizing mass actions in the more recent period, though. That would be the biggest argument against my assessment that the struggle is moving forward. I&#39;m not sure that&#39;s gone so far as to change things basically, though.


The number of catholics in the six counties will not alter its composition, either. The voting wards have always been drawn to effectively disenfranchise catholic voters. There&#39;s no basis for assuming this will change.

OK, Catholics will continue to be underrepresented, fine. At least until they get into a position to redraw the districts...

A underrepresented majority still has more representation than an underrepresented minority. There are limits to what can be done with gerrymandering. This&#39;ll be decided in struggle.


The &#39;excuse&#39; of the IRA is not an issue either. There was almost no IRA when the Loyalists launched their pogroms in 69. To justify emergency measures, including mass arrests of catholic civilians and interning them in WWII-style concentration camps Loyalists simply set off their own bomb and blamed it on the fenians. If history is any indication, they don&#39;t need an excuse, or they&#39;ll invent one&#33;

Yeah, that&#39;s what ultralefts always say, that the state doesn&#39;t need an excuse. It&#39;s nonsense in general and specifically here.

This is not &#39;69.

[slim]

Severian. The IRA was as said a result of orange pogroms. Try saying it isnt to the thousands of catholics forced out of their homes or the men who watched as the protesatants were allowed by the British army to attack these areas.

Learn about the troubles then you may speak on these matters. The IRA&#39;s orders are even a true example of this truth. (not exact quotes)

Standing order one: form local defence units to protect catholics (arm local population)
Two: form units that can assist others in troubled areas (operatives of IRA)
three: form offensive units that can attack the British.

Also, how can you say he is being ultraleft if the orange always accuse the IRA of being ultra right catholics. That was why the fear of catholic insurrection began. Houden.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 08:46 AM
Severian. The IRA was as said a result of orange pogroms. Try saying it isnt to the thousands of catholics forced out of their homes or the men who watched as the protesatants were allowed by the British army to attack these areas.
That&#39;s not in dispute.


Also, how can you say he is being ultraleft if the orange always accuse the IRA of being ultra right catholics.

What? I&#39;m not Orange and McGlinchey&#39;s not IRA, so....relevance?

If anything, what I&#39;m saying is closer to what Sinn Fein&#39;s been saying, and McGlinchey&#39;s a supporter of another political group in NI, the IRSP....

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Severian+Jul 30 2005, 01:11 AM--> (Severian @ Jul 30 2005, 01:11 AM)
[email protected] 29 2005, 12:12 AM
The demoralisation caused by the Provos&#39; disintegration has basically turned aggression inward. Attacks against immigrants, homosexuals and &#39;the other side&#39; have dramatically increased.
Are you saying there are more attacks on the "other side" now than when the IRA was actively fighting?



[/b]
Yes, sectarianism is on the rise dramatically. It&#39;s the logical outcome of republicans dumping their anti-imperialism and adopting essentially the british outlook, that the war was between two fueding tribes, and if only the Brits could referee the proceedings they could get along. Identification with &#39;nationalist&#39; and &#39;unionist&#39; is stronger than ever, and this is the great victory the gfa has scored over us. It has pitted the communities against each other more than ever, fighting over scraps.


Protestant Loyalists have reacted to the threat to their power by increasing attacks on Catholics.


So there is a new threat to their power? Or at least they think so. They seem to agree more with my assessment than yours, then.

Are you saying there are more attacks on Catholics than before the ceasefire?

The Loyalists always react this way, to any reforms, no matter how cosmetic. I don&#39;t deny there have been changes. We republican socialists have taken these changes into account, and we understand how the cosmetic reforms (that is, reforms that make the six county colony more attractive to multinational investment without improving the living stadards of the working class) are a part of the British counterinsurgency.


I think it&#39;ll be harder for London to turn a blind eye to ongoing Loyalist terrorism without the possibility of distracting attention onto the (silent) guns of the IRA....

Unless a significant section of the catholics of the six counties go over to the British side, the foothold the Brits have for maintaining control over their colony are the Unionists and Loyalists, so they must appease or at least keep confrontation with them to a minimum. As British forces continue to withdraw, their ability to facedown Loyalist anti-agreement forces will diminish. The situation will thus only become worse on the ground.


Not in dispute. The question is, will the Unionist veto remain intact forever?

No, not forever. Our day will come.


Today&#39;s news is, the Brits are dismantling more of their military presence in South Armagh. That&#39;s at least an inch of progress right there...we&#39;ll see how well your prediction pans out in future.

That&#39;s not progress. . . that&#39;s their normalisation policy. It will as I said before, simply give the local security forces more power over their neighbours.

Keep in mind that this is still a colony . . . it&#39;s in the imperialist&#39;s interest to not portray it as so. But there is still not a functioning gov&#39;t in place, and there will likely not be one.


This agreement keeps the masses as spectators, when at least the armed campaign involved them directly and indirectly on a much larger scale. Now we&#39;re just asked to support this or that agreement or emergency meeting, or this or that leader who can save us.


Seems to me there&#39;ve been more mass actions, at least during the early part of the agreement, than before. All the stuff around the "marching season" for example.

Sinn Fein has been overemphasizing the electoral side of things and underemphasizing mass actions in the more recent period, though. That would be the biggest argument against my assessment that the struggle is moving forward. I&#39;m not sure that&#39;s gone so far as to change things basically, though.

The largest period of mass action would&#39;ve been the protests against interment, the civil rights period, and the struggle against criminalisation. Nowadays, many of these protests are carefully orchestrated Shinner PR events, and only partially community organised and not at all spontaneous.


The &#39;excuse&#39; of the IRA is not an issue either. There was almost no IRA when the Loyalists launched their pogroms in 69. To justify emergency measures, including mass arrests of catholic civilians and interning them in WWII-style concentration camps Loyalists simply set off their own bomb and blamed it on the fenians. If history is any indication, they don&#39;t need an excuse, or they&#39;ll invent one&#33;


Yeah, that&#39;s what ultralefts always say, that the state doesn&#39;t need an excuse. It&#39;s nonsense in general and specifically here.

This is not &#39;69.

Though you dismiss the example I provided . . . it&#39;s actually true.

Observation trumps theory. So what does that say about your theory?