Home Rule in Ireland

[Oglaigh na hEireann]

The fight has been going on for countless years now, with many events dotting its timeline. Many with bloodied outcomes, or failed cous.

On January 30th, 1972, an event called Bloody Sunday took place on the streets of Derry, near the Rossville flats in Ireland. That morning, the British Army's 1st Parachute regiment opened fire on unarmned civilians and demonstrators, killing 14, and wounding countless others.

The march was deemed "illegal" by the British government. The reason for the march was to protest Britains new law that made it legal for internment without trial.

Events like this have been happening in Ireland ever since the British unlawfully took control over the countries politics. In the last few decades, the British "Empire" has let go of its colonies, except for Ireland. The ignorance of British politics must stop, and their recognition of a fully independent Ireland must begin.



-Sean

[bolshevik butcher]

I was in ireland recently, i went through belfast on the 13th, it really hit you how divided the place was. I saw the socialsit party of ireland in belfast on saturday but i didn't have time to talk to them, is there an established left in ireland or it it small groups aginst the large sectarian parties?

[praxis1966]

Actually, the Irish Socialist Party and Republican Sinn Fein are both socialist. I don't think the ISP has won any seats at the federal level, but Oglaigh could probably tell you definatively. Unfortunatley, the current Fianna Fail government never seems to tire of pandering to multinational conglomerations. Check the Newswire thread on the Shell/Statoil natural gas extraction issue for more info that way. Furthermore, they've even thrown in their lot with the British government itself recently. It didn't take too much convincing before they decided follow suit with a national ID card system complimentary to the one Britain is currently planning.

[bolshevik butcher]

sienn fain is not socialist. It's sectarian and seems more concerned about religon than wealth redistribution.

[JC1]

errr ... no. Sein Finn is a Green Natinolist party with a psuedo-marxist outlook. The Struggle has nothing to do with religion, BTW. Thats just a pretext and flag around with various orginizations rallies.

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 25 2005, 11:52 AM
sienn fain is not socialist. It's sectarian and seems more concerned about religon than wealth redistribution.
Sinn Fein is a secular organisation. I don't like them, they do fuck all for their communities. But I hate when people try to say the struggle here is to do with religion.

[Oglaigh na hEireann]

The struggle is for the removal of any kind of British presence within Ireland.

[BOZG]

Originally posted by [email protected] 25 2005, 02:08 PM
errr ... no. Sein Finn is a Green Natinolist party with a psuedo-marxist outlook. The Struggle has nothing to do with religion, BTW. Thats just a pretext and flag around with various orginizations rallies.
They haven't had any sort of pseudo-Marxist outlook in a long time, if they ever had it. They are a big business party.


Praxis,
There is no Irish Socialist Party (ISP). There is the Socialist Party (SP) or the Irish Republican Socialist Party (IRSP).

[Seven Stars]

He was referring to Republican Sinn Fein(RSF) not Provisional Sinn Fein(referred to in the media as Sinn Fein but have no right to the name since they became a reformist party). RSF's goal is for a 32 County Federal Democratic Socialist Republic. For more info go to www.rsf.ie or check out my website www.upthera.net .

The Struggle has nothing to do with Religion, but that is what the British Establishment would want people to think.

[h&s]

There will be no solution to the 'troubles' in Ireland under capitalism. So long as these false borders exist and sectarian fueds are provoked to maintain this it will always be the same.
Only when the working class unites together will conflicts such as this be resolved.
And that does not mean 'socialism' from the Republican movement as that will only make the situation worse as it freezes out the whole Protestant community.

[Anti-establishment]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 25 2005, 11:52 AM
sienn fain is not socialist. It's sectarian and seems more concerned about religon than wealth redistribution.
Examples of sectarianism.....?

[h&s]

Its Republican. Obviously. :rolleyes:

[Seven Stars]

Originally posted by h&[email protected] 26 2005, 01:11 PM
And that does not mean 'socialism' from the Republican movement as that will only make the situation worse as it freezes out the whole Protestant community.
Republicanism is non-sectarian. Its founder was a Protestant and so was many great Republicans. I know quite a few Protestants who are Republican. If you read the Republican policy document, Eire Nua, you would see that our plan for a new Ireland will accommodate the Unionist community.

[bolshevik butcher]

Why do they always defend the IRA then? Even when they have attacked illegitimate targets?

[Seven Stars]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 26 2005, 09:07 PM
Why do they always defend the IRA then? Even when they have attacked illegitimate targets?
What illegitimate targets? While some innocent people were killed, civilians were never targeted. It is unfortunante that innocents were killed but it is a war.

[Anti-establishment]

Even thought Irish Republican will be ostracised here for his comment, it is true that the would IRA give warnings, and the times they didn't they apologised for, including the death of every non-combatant in the conflict.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by h&[email protected] 26 2005, 01:21 PM
Its Republican. Obviously. :rolleyes:


Then by your simplistic and ignorant defintion, Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin and Connolly were sectarians, since they all supported (and all took a role in the struggle except Lenin and Engels) freeing Ireland from British rule, which is what maintains sectarian divisions in Ireland.

The test of theory is practice. In the 26 counties, which are not under Brit occupation, sectarianism is very rare and people don't care about what your religion is. Unlike the north, which is more polarised then ever, more religious as well.

Why don't you and Clenched Fist actually research the issue before running your mouths.

[bolshevik butcher]

Oglach i never critcized sien fein because they were republican, i am an amdireer or conlley, i crtiticized them because they seem very reactionary.

[h&s]

Then by your simplistic and ignorant defintion, Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin and Connolly were sectarians, since they all supported (and all took a role in the struggle except Lenin and Engels) freeing Ireland from British rule, which is what maintains sectarian divisions in Ireland.

But the situation is far more complex now than it was then. The artificial splitting-up of Ireland into two countries changes things.
I used to be a supporter of Republicanism myself, but because the majority of people in the Northern 6 counties aren't republican made me change my mind.
I don't see the point in freeing Ireland from British rule, which creates more problems, when freeing it from capitalism will solve the problems.


The test of theory is practice. In the 26 counties, which are not under Brit occupation, sectarianism is very rare and people don't care about what your religion is. Unlike the north, which is more polarised then ever, more religious as well.
I'm not talking about the south. It is the north that has the problem.


What illegitimate targets?
Birmingham pubs, mainland Britain.
Its not a fucking war anymore, and don't ever try to justify terrorism.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 27 2005, 11:25 AM
Oglach i never critcized sien fein because they were republican, i am an amdireer or conlley, i crtiticized them because they seem very reactionary.
Fair enough criticising Sinn Fein, doesn't bother me a bit, but I still find your analysis of Ireland to be wrong.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by h&[email protected] 27 2005, 01:13 PM

Then by your simplistic and ignorant defintion, Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin and Connolly were sectarians, since they all supported (and all took a role in the struggle except Lenin and Engels) freeing Ireland from British rule, which is what maintains sectarian divisions in Ireland.

But the situation is far more complex now than it was then. The artificial splitting-up of Ireland into two countries changes things.
I used to be a supporter of Republicanism myself, but because the majority of people in the Northern 6 counties aren't republican made me change my mind.
I don't see the point in freeing Ireland from British rule, which creates more problems, when freeing it from capitalism will solve the problems.


The test of theory is practice. In the 26 counties, which are not under Brit occupation, sectarianism is very rare and people don't care about what your religion is. Unlike the north, which is more polarised then ever, more religious as well.
I'm not talking about the south. It is the north that has the problem.


What illegitimate targets?
Birmingham pubs, mainland Britain.
Its not a fucking war anymore, and don't ever try to justify terrorism.
The situation is more complex because the British method of control has changed, not the basic dynamic. It requires a different response, more social than the physical force republican strategy has been, but then republican socialists have been saying this since the late ninteenth century.

I mentioned the south, because the south is largely devoid of sectarianism, proving that the tribes theory is bullshit. Remove the Brits and you remove sectarianism.

[JC1]

hell, uptill a few years ago, the UVF even suppourted a british pullout. A Free State of Ulster, however, would probobly end up becoming part of ireland.

Leme ask a question : Why is it that this forum dosent tolerate racism about blacks,hispanic's, ect era, but when its Anti-Irish Orange or British Chauvinism, its A-OK ?

[bolshevik butcher]

Oglach i didn't even present an analysis of ireland. If i was a northen irish socialist i dont know if id want northen irelnd to be part of the republic of ireland, it seems like the church still has a big influence there, abortion is still illegal there.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 27 2005, 05:07 PM
Oglach i didn't even present an analysis of ireland. If i was a northen irish socialist i dont know if id want northen irelnd to be part of the republic of ireland, it seems like the church still has a big influence there, abortion is still illegal there.
Even mainstream Republicans like Rauri O Bradaigh of SF don't want to simply merge with the 'republic' (a neo-colonial state which republicans refuse to recognise). As ROB said, smashing the Orange state is the only way for the people of the 26 counties to escape Leinster House.

If you were a socialist who was so afraid of uniting with the rest of the working class on your island, I'd say you were a bit ignorant or scared of the wrong enemy. Look at the religious state that is the six counties, 'a protestant parliament for a protestant people.'

[bolshevik butcher]

It also must be considered though that in the even of socialism in northen irealnd it's very unlikely that social progressivness would only have exploded there, it's quite likely that the rest of the UK and the republic would be heading in the same direction.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 05:04 PM
hell, uptill a few years ago, the UVF even suppourted a british pullout. A Free State of Ulster, however, would probobly end up becoming part of ireland.

Leme ask a question : Why is it that this forum dosent tolerate racism about blacks,hispanic's, ect era, but when its Anti-Irish Orange or British Chauvinism, its A-OK ?
I've often wondered the same thing.

If people said things that have been said about Irish on here, for example black liberation is pointless, they'll be on the dole anyway, that person would be considered a racist and booted out.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by h&[email protected] 27 2005, 08:13 AM

What illegitimate targets?
Birmingham pubs, mainland Britain.
Its not a fucking war anymore, and don't ever try to justify terrorism.
Not exactly Mr. Current Affairs are you? The IRA has publicly apologized for those attacks by name. Something, I might add, you'll never see the other side do.


Oglach i never critcized sien fein because they were republican, i am an amdireer or conlley, i crtiticized them because they seem very reactionary.

You might change your tune if you had ever bothered to read An Phoblacht instead of basing your opinion on BBC propaganda.


He was referring to Republican Sinn Fein(RSF)...

Will you be my C3-PO?


If people said things that have been said about Irish on here, for example black liberation is pointless, they'll be on the dole anyway, that person would be considered a racist and booted out.

I've raised this issue before, but for whatever reason people from Quebec, Australia, and the U$ seem to think they have a better handle on what amounts to bigotry in that part of the world than people who live there. As a side note, I've often wondered why it is the good members of this board seem to support every national liberation movement around the world regardless of how reactionary it is, but when it comes to Irish unification alot of what you seem to hear is "The people of Northern Ireland need to stop whining about what flag is flying over their heads" and the like.


There is no Irish Socialist Party (ISP). There is the Socialist Party (SP) or the Irish Republican Socialist Party (IRSP).

My mistake.

[h&s]

Remove the Brits and you remove sectarianism.
But will you?
What about all the pissed off loyalists?
I agree with your sentiments, but for me fighting for a United Ireland of this type is a waste of time.
To me the only solution would be a socialist revolution and a United British Isles.



Not exactly Mr. Current Affairs are you? The IRA has publicly apologized for those attacks by name. Something, I might add, you'll never see the other side do.
Admitedly no.
The post was saying that the IRA had never attacked illegitimate targets though, and, regardless of whether they apologised or not, the Birmingham attacks were illegitimate targets.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 05:25 AM

If people said things that have been said about Irish on here, for example black liberation is pointless, they'll be on the dole anyway, that person would be considered a racist and booted out.

I've raised this issue before, but for whatever reason people from Quebec, Australia, and the U$ seem to think they have a better handle on what amounts to bigotry in that part of the world than people who live there. As a side note, I've often wondered why it is the good members of this board seem to support every national liberation movement around the world regardless of how reactionary it is, but when it comes to Irish unification alot of what you seem to hear is "The people of Northern Ireland need to stop whining about what flag is flying over their heads" and the like.
You're right, there are certainly some clueless types (who nevertheless run their mouth at the drop of a hat on any issue) within the Trendy Left, but you and I are in good company. Martin Luther King Jr, Karl Marx, Lenin, Mumia abu Jamal, Nelson Mandela (though he's a sellout today) and many others who aren't Irish support our cause.

In fact I have a very good documentary about a group of American civil rights activists who visit the north. They go there thinking they'll convince the Irish to use non-violent methods, but by the end realise the Irish had no choice! It's very good.

[Seven Stars]

Just a note the statement released today was by the Provisional IRA, they gave up the revolutionary path 19 years ago and this statement was 19 years coming. The True IRA, that under the leadership of the Continuity Army Council, has not given up in the fight for Irish Freedom.

praxis1966, I will not be your c3po, but I will be Yoda.

[bolshevik butcher]

What do you guys think of the IRA saying they;ll give up violence?

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28 2005, 07:09 PM
Just a note the statement released today was by the Provisional IRA, they gave up the revolutionary path 19 years ago and this statement was 19 years coming. The True IRA, that under the leadership of the Continuity Army Council, has not given up in the fight for Irish Freedom.

praxis1966, I will not be your c3po, but I will be Yoda.
Yeah we'll see how far the "true" IRA's fight for freedom gets them.

[Seeker]

If they really do destroy their guns, I think it will be a mistake. However, if they say they have destroyed thier guns, when they are really just hidden away, that might be an act of genius.

I live thousands of miles away and have not devoted much time to researching the current political situation, so if the IRA think the next phase is non-violent who am I to say otherwise?

All I will say is that to dissarm is always a mistake.

[bolshevik butcher]

I don't know if it is. The way the IRA has used its guns in the past makes me think it might be better if they were without them. I hope the loyalist paramilitaries now diarm but its unlikely.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Clenched [email protected] 29 2005, 11:25 AM
I don't know if it is. The way the IRA has used its guns in the past makes me think it might be better if they were without them. I hope the loyalist paramilitaries now diarm but its unlikely.
Who will defend the catholic communities if another pogrom happens? Like the one in '69, which led to the formation of the Provisionals?

Judging by the amount of attacks lately that have gone on unhindered, it's unlikely the 'security forces' would step in to help. And if the Provies and their mass support base demand that the Brits implement the GFA, the Loyalist nutters like Paisley (who consumed the 'moderate' Unionists like Trimble) and the PUP (bigots scaring children!) will react like the nutters they are. . . with violence.

History repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, second time as farce . . .

[Seven Stars]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 04:36 PM
Who will defend the catholic communities if another pogrom happens? Like the one in '69, which led to the formation of the Provisionals?

Judging by the amount of attacks lately that have gone on unhindered, it's unlikely the 'security forces' would step in to help. And if the Provies and their mass support base demand that the Brits implement the GFA, the Loyalist nutters like Paisley (who consumed the 'moderate' Unionists like Trimble) and the PUP (bigots scaring children!) will react like the nutters they are. . . with violence.

History repeats itself, the first time as tragedy, second time as farce . . .
I think the INLA are the only ones in a position that they could protect the Nationalist communities. I wish I could say the same thing about the CIRA, but I honestly can't, at least as of now.

[praxis1966]

Well, after the stupidity the CIRA pulled at that parade a couple of weeks ago, I have a hard time supporting them. They came dreadfully close to injuring withe their molotov cocktails some of the people they were supposed to be protecting, and managed to damage some property which belonged to republicans. I like their verve, but they need discipline.

[Seven Stars]

Originally posted by [email protected] 30 2005, 12:50 AM
Well, after the stupidity the CIRA pulled at that parade a couple of weeks ago, I have a hard time supporting them. They came dreadfully close to injuring withe their molotov cocktails some of the people they were supposed to be protecting, and managed to damage some property which belonged to republicans. I like their verve, but they need discipline.
They didn't throw petrol bombs they threw blast bombs. They ingured 80 RUC, so I would commend them for their work. They were going to fire on them, but didn't want to hurt any nationalists.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2005, 11:25 PM
As a side note, I've often wondered why it is the good members of this board seem to support every national liberation movement around the world regardless of how reactionary it is, but when it comes to Irish unification alot of what you seem to hear is "The people of Northern Ireland need to stop whining about what flag is flying over their heads" and the like.
Probably the same reason it's easier to support the "Iraqi resistance" than Al-Qaeda people setting off bombs in London.

i.e. there are fewer consequences for supporting armed struggle further from home.

[praxis1966]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 08:54 PM
Probably the same reason it's easier to support the "Iraqi resistance" than Al-Qaeda people setting off bombs in London.

i.e. there are fewer consequences for supporting armed struggle further from home.
I guess then by that same logic then the North American members who have argued so vehemently in oposition to the republican struggle do so because they don't directly have to deal with the threat of Orange violence. I suppose when you have the luxury of geographic isolation it's easy to talk in terms of theoretical vagaries.


They didn't throw petrol bombs they threw blast bombs. They ingured 80 RUC, so I would commend them for their work. They were going to fire on them, but didn't want to hurt any nationalists.

If that was the case then perhaps they shouldn't have thrown them within such close proximity to the republican demonstrators in the first place. In any case, I stand by my original conclusion; I like their verve, but they need discipline.

I agree that they have every right to attempt to use any means necessary to dissuade an illegal parade through republican neighborhoods. The Parades Commission has proved that it will only reward threats of violence by the unionists with allowing illegal parade routes, despite any initial ruling to the contrary. It is essential that the the unionists know that if governmental authority won't protect republicans, republicans will. I also have no problem with taking on the RUC occupational force. I just wish that CIRA would use less of a, for lack of a better word, scattergun approach in doing so.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Severian+Jul 30 2005, 01:54 AM--> (Severian @ Jul 30 2005, 01:54 AM)
[email protected] 27 2005, 11:25 PM
As a side note, I've often wondered why it is the good members of this board seem to support every national liberation movement around the world regardless of how reactionary it is, but when it comes to Irish unification alot of what you seem to hear is "The people of Northern Ireland need to stop whining about what flag is flying over their heads" and the like.
Probably the same reason it's easier to support the "Iraqi resistance" than Al-Qaeda people setting off bombs in London.

i.e. there are fewer consequences for supporting armed struggle further from home. [/b]
That's dodging the issue . . . many republicans don't believe violence has a role to play right now, others do. Republicans are overall less violent than most revolutionaries, easily. We're trying to build support for our cause, not necessarily our methods. There is outright hostility for our cause from much of the left.

[Severian]

Originally posted by praxis1966+Jul 29 2005, 11:32 PM--> (praxis1966 @ Jul 29 2005, 11:32 PM)
Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2005, 08:54 PM
Probably the same reason it's easier to support the "Iraqi resistance" than Al-Qaeda people setting off bombs in London.

i.e. there are fewer consequences for supporting armed struggle further from home.
I guess then by that same logic then the North American members who have argued so vehemently in oposition to the republican struggle do so because they don't directly have to deal with the threat of Orange violence. I suppose when you have the luxury of geographic isolation it's easy to talk in terms of theoretical vagaries.[/b]
Hm? No, I don't see that following. But it might explain why it's easier to support the IRA in the US than in the UK, and why some people in the US support the IRA who aren't that militant about anything directly involving Washington.


[email protected] 30 2005, 02:22 PM
That's dodging the issue . . . many republicans don't believe violence has a role to play right now, others do. Republicans are overall less violent than most revolutionaries, easily. We're trying to build support for our cause, not necessarily our methods. There is outright hostility for our cause from much of the left.
OK, it's easier to support independence for a more distant part of the empire. For similar reasons.