ETA

[Red October]

i need to learn about ETA. what ideology to they subscribe to? are they really terrorists? and have their actions actually helped the basques?

[Q]

Originally posted by Red October [email protected] 19, 2006 12:02 pm
are they really terrorists?
:lol: :lol: :lol:


and have their actions actually helped the basques?
Depends on how you look at the problem: yes it helped, because the Spanish authorities certainly think twice before they fuck with Basques. No it didn't help them, because they didn't get independance after all those years.

[cumbia]

They murdered the successor to Franco, thats quite admireable. Rumor has it they would call the places they were going to bomb to make sure there wasnt anyone else besides their intended target.

[Q]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2006 03:02 pm
They murdered the successor to Franco, thats quite admireable.
Oh, really? That's cool, didn't know that.


Rumor has it they would call the places they were going to bomb to make sure there wasnt anyone else besides their intended target.
That's not just a rumor. The IRA did the same.

[Ander]

As the resident (and possibly only) Basque of the boards, I will try to help you as much as possible.

Although ETA originally adopted a Marxist ideology, in later years it seems it has unfortunately become more nationalist with less emphasis on socialism. It is truly hard to say how devoted to worker's struggle ETA is, but my guess is they want a Basque nation to begin with before they make any moves with socialism.

As for the terrorist allegations, I'm going to have to say yes. In their earlier years they played a more "freedom fighter" role but recently their actions have targeted civilians rather than political figures. It is true that they have begun to call their intended targets ahead of time, but this practice has only been in effect since 2003.

Perhaps their most distinguished and important assassination was that of Luis Carrero Blanco, Franco's right hand man and most likely successor. If you want to know more about this, read up on Operation Ogro. This might help some as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrero_Blanco

And again, whether they have helped the Basque people is questionable. Have they accomplished their ultimate goal of Basque national liberation? No, obviously not. But they have helped them in other ways, such as protecting them from a lot of Spanish repression (not all however) and possibly assisting in the fall of the Francoist regime.

Personally I support their goals but not their actions nor methods.

[Guevarist]

Personally I support their goals but not their actions nor methods.
same for me....
i like the methods of the zapatistas, they hardly use any violence...

[Ander]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2006 04:13 pm
i like the methods of the zapatistas, they hardly use any violence...
Yeah, but they also haven't accomplished shit.

[Phalanx]

Neither has AIM, ETA, or the PIRA, but that doesn't mean we should give up the fight.

[Ander]

That is precisely why I am criticising their lack of action.

[Phalanx]

The Zapatistas' military arm was pretty much knocked out at the start of the uprising, so their lack of action is due to momentary defeat.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by Tatanka [email protected] 19, 2006 06:58 pm
Neither has AIM, ETA, or the PIRA, but that doesn't mean we should give up the fight.
We should continue to fight for our goals, but we should certainly not continue the armed specialists.

[Phalanx]

We should take up arms when it suits us, but we should stay away from meaningless violence.

[Q]

Originally posted by Tatanka [email protected] 20, 2006 04:04 am
We should take up arms when it suits us, but we should stay away from meaningless violence.
Exactly, individual terrorism is only a plus for the bourgeoisie.

[Ander]

Although I agree that meaningless violence does nothing for us, one must admire ETA for putting their ideas and words to action. While they have degenerated into nothing more than a terrorist organization, their intentions were noble and they have struck some serious blows against the Spanish state. I believe they need time to organize, among themselves, and as well as their political wing Batasuna.

By the way, I recently read that Batasuna received between 10-20% of the Basque vote. For a leftist party in a predominantly Catholic society, that has been declared a terrorist group by the US, those numbers are quite impressive.

[The Grey Blur]

I don't see how they were in any way Socialist...rather than tagging on 'Socialist' somewhere in every statement, a bit like the PIRA, but never actually acting on it...

[Y Chwyldro Comiwnyddol Cymraeg]

I think ETA have killed too many civilians. I agree with their motives, but their methods must be questioned. Basicly their republican socialists

[Janus]

Previous threads on the ETA.

ETA (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=58639&hl=Basque)

ETA (http://www.revleft.com/index.php?showtopic=56473&hl=Basque)

[razboz]

I heard that Eta only enjoyed a 5% support base in Basque country. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETA) A lot of spaniards hate ETA too. I personally disaprove of any Nationalist movement. The Zapatistas are not comparable in terms of ideology because they attempt to change the living standards of "all Mexicans" and generally "all sisters and borthers of the world" according to their 1st Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle. In contrast the Basque liberation movement seeks to help a linguistic minority gain independence from Spain. Once they have independance what willl they live off? Will they be better off? Will they be living in dignity under the poverty line?Sory but i dont buy into any "revolutionary" movmement that pops along. ETA ar eno better than glorified nationalist terrorists. If the any, and i mean any, other eurpopean natioanlist movement were to use similar tactics it would be accused of being a violent right-wing organisation and branded "terrorist". For example the bretons (france) had a nationalist movement and they ended supporting the aggressive nationalist policies of one A. Hitler. Later they came to form one of the strogest support bases for many bretons white natonalist movements attempting to protect their language and culture from the Frnech "oppression". But i ask you, what is nationality? Why are these people focusing on their little intestinal fights against a perceived oppression against their minority, when this minority a) exists only tenuously and b) does not really form a true cohesive identity. Does not class form the mosst powerful social adehsive? Class is after all what defines us in the eyes of the bourgeois uper and governing classes, not race, not language not ethnicity. These are just differenciations designed to separate us into little boxes. Thus any fight to strengthen these divides through the creation of separate states where no separate state is necessary or even wanted by the inhabitants of the territory to be used. can be defined as little more than useless squabling at best and outright harmfull at worst. Having said all this if any person is the subject of attack. than this person should be defended and their right guaranteed. In Vietnam for example the fight agains tthe AMericans was a fight for national independance, but first and foremost against imperialist rule in their country. This is why several million vietnamese died. Not for Vietnam, but against oppression.

[OneBrickOneVoice]

They just set off a car bomb ending the truce.

[Fawkes]

Originally posted by Permanent [email protected] 20, 2006 12:38 pm
I don't see how they were in any way Socialist...rather than tagging on 'Socialist' somewhere in every statement, a bit like the PIRA, but never actually acting on it...
The Provos never claimed to be Socialist. THat was one of the reasons that they split with the OIRA.


Neither has AIM,

Jeez, I haven't heard about them in a long time.

[The Grey Blur]

Originally posted by Freedom for all...ALL+January 02, 2007 12:38 am--> (Freedom for all...ALL @ January 02, 2007 12:38 am)
Permanent [email protected] 20, 2006 12:38 pm
I don't see how they were in any way Socialist...rather than tagging on 'Socialist' somewhere in every statement, a bit like the PIRA, but never actually acting on it...
The Provos never claimed to be Socialist. THat was one of the reasons that they split with the OIRA. [/b]
:lol: I'm being told the history of my own backyard now.

The Provisionals split from the Official IRA because of the latter's reformism and inabilty to defend Catholic areas from Loyalist attacks, not from any deep-rooted ideological difference.

Many Provisional Republicans espoused Socialism all the way through the troubles and many of their more militant working class members still do. Hearing Provos talk about Connolly and the ICA in reverential tones was what actually first turned me on to Socialism.

[Fawkes]

I said it was ONE of the reasons that the Provos split from the OIRA, I know that the main reason was because the OIRA wasn't militant enough. The rest of what you said is true however, a lot of the more socialist Provos joined the INLA which caused a lot of the rifts between the two groups.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by Tatanka [email protected] 19, 2006 10:04 pm
We should take up arms when it suits us, but we should stay away from meaningless violence.
Taking up arms is something entirely seperate from allowing the existence of armed specialists. Arms are a tool, not the tool, and the nature of the struggle should never be limited as such.