Question to Irish left Pacifist's

[redflag32]

Why do some leftists reject Imperialism in palestine or Iraq but ignore British Imperialism that has survived in Ireland for 800 years? I find it hard to understand why Irish socialists can speak out about Imperialism in Cuba's history or Palestine but are silent when it comes to the occupied 6 counties. Is this that they are afraid of upsetting the protestant workers who see anti-imperialism in Ireland as pro-sectarianism or is it that they accept the Unionist veto?

[Redmau5]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 01:41 pm
Why do some leftists reject Imperialism in palestine or Iraq but ignore British Imperialism that has survived in Ireland for 800 years? I find it hard to understand why Irish socialists can speak out about Imperialism in Cuba's history or Palestine but are silent when it comes to the occupied 6 counties. Is this that they are afraid of upsetting the protestant workers who see anti-imperialism in Ireland as pro-sectarianism or is it that they accept the Unionist veto?
How is it possible to be a socialist and ignore imperialism in Ireland? Although there are many different kinds of socialists in Ireland who believe in different methods of removing the British presense, all agree that partition was a anti-democratic and criminal act.

[Coggeh]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 01:41 pm
Why do some leftists reject Imperialism in palestine or Iraq but ignore British Imperialism that has survived in Ireland for 800 years? I find it hard to understand why Irish socialists can speak out about Imperialism in Cuba's history or Palestine but are silent when it comes to the occupied 6 counties. Is this that they are afraid of upsetting the protestant workers who see anti-imperialism in Ireland as pro-sectarianism or is it that they accept the Unionist veto?
We don't call out publicly for the removal of the brits because we organise up the north and have a strong prodestant base and pretty much don't want to upset it .We believe in removing the brits when theirs a unity of the workers and all (or most) can see that its better for the working class prodestant or catholic .

[redflag32]

Originally posted by Coggy+May 27, 2007 03:24 pm--> (Coggy @ May 27, 2007 03:24 pm)
[email protected] 27, 2007 01:41 pm
Why do some leftists reject Imperialism in palestine or Iraq but ignore British Imperialism that has survived in Ireland for 800 years? I find it hard to understand why Irish socialists can speak out about Imperialism in Cuba's history or Palestine but are silent when it comes to the occupied 6 counties. Is this that they are afraid of upsetting the protestant workers who see anti-imperialism in Ireland as pro-sectarianism or is it that they accept the Unionist veto?
We don't call out publicly for the removal of the brits because we organise up the north and have a strong prodestant base and pretty much don't want to upset it .We believe in removing the brits when theirs a unity of the workers and all (or most) can see that its better for the working class prodestant or catholic . [/b]
Isnt that unprincipled though? I dont see the advantage of trying to fool the protestant people into believeing you dont want a united ireland. Its what Connolly called gas and water socialist's.

[Coggeh]

we want a socialist ireland first , and for that we need the workers support of all backgrounds . Once we have it ,it will fast become apparent that a united ireland is better for the working class as a whole .

[redflag32]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 03:33 pm
we want a socialist ireland first , and for that we need the workers support of all backgrounds . Once we have it ,it will fast become apparent that a united ireland is better for the working class as a whole .
But you cant have a socialist Ireland before you tackle Iperialism,it just isnt possible,so eventually your position will have to be principled,why delay that untill the very end? You can have a principled unity with protetant workers,even unionists on things that affect us both,but i dont see the need to shy away from our anti-imperialist ideals.

It would be impossible to achieve a socialist country first because of the border,it represents the division of the workers andit has to be smashed. Im not saying we should ignore the protestant or unionst working class,but i do think we should be honest in our approach to them.

[Cheung Mo]

All socialists are republican? I thought there were avowed Marxists in the PUP (although theirs would be the most nonsensical bastardisation of Marx since the old SACP's White Workers of the World Unite.).

[bolshevik butcher]

I think that Irish socialists must be prepaired to call for the removal of British imperialist forces from Ireland, and its partition. However they must also make the call for a united Ireland on a socialist basis, it seems the only way to unite the working class and beyond this provide any real solution to the problems of the Irish working class.

[The Grey Blur]

We aren't pacifists you idiot, we take a principled Marxist position which is that we disagree with individual terrorism. We supported the setting up of cross-community worker's militias to oppose the British troops, and when this became unrealistic we still supported the right to self-defence for under-siege Catholic areas.

We don't ignore British Imperialism in Ireland since we were some of the first to call for the withdrawal of troops when they first arrived in the late 60s. But today, such a slogan would be pointless as the British ruling class wants out of Northern Ireland, which is simply a huge drain on their resources.

We believe on uniting the workers on common issues while promoting Socialism as the only means forward. This is not "gas-and-waterworks" Socialism, this is based on the Transitional Program of putting forward transitional, realistic, demands while linking these with a wider anti-capitalist perspective. It appears you are the one ignoring Connolly - a united capitalist Ireland will mean nothing but a different coloured flag. Sectarianism won't disappear overnight.

Personally I disagree with the IRSP on a number of issues but at least I don't start threads attacking them falsely.

[Sir Aunty Christ]

I think that there are protestant socialists (the PUP, as much as i believe that they're the only unionist party who've made any sense over the last 10 years, don't really count) who are wary of bringing up the issue of British imperialism especially if they've been brought up in a staunchly unionist environment. Unless they analyse the situation (I'm talking particularly about young socialist who don't have the experience yet to have fully fledged ideas) they will also be uneasy about calling for a United Ireland because they have been brought up accepting British rule as a good thing.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by Permanent [email protected] 27, 2007 04:46 pm
We aren't pacifists you idiot, we take a principled Marxist position which is that we disagree with individual terrorism. We supported the setting up of cross-community worker's militias to oppose the British troops, and when this became unrealistic we still supported the right to self-defence for under-siege Catholic areas.

We don't ignore British Imperialism in Ireland since we were some of the first to call for the withdrawal of troops when they first arrived in the late 60s. But today, such a slogan would be pointless as the British ruling class wants out of Northern Ireland, which is simply a huge drain on their resources.

We believe on uniting the workers on common issues while promoting Socialism as the only means forward. This is not "gas-and-waterworks" Socialism, this is based on the Transitional Program of putting forward transitional, realistic, demands while linking these with a wider anti-capitalist perspective. It appears you are the one ignoring Connolly - a united capitalist Ireland will mean nothing but a different coloured flag. Sectarianism won't disappear overnight.

Personally I disagree with the IRSP on a number of issues but at least I don't start threads attacking them falsely.
What on earth are you on about,im not a member of the IRSP and this wasnt an attack on whatever political party you assocate with. I think its a bit childish for you to answer my question with a personal insult. Im not an idiot thank you very much,just interested in hearing others views and opinions,if you cant handle this then dont speak with me. :(

[The Grey Blur]

However did I make that mistake? (Seeing as you have an IRSP board in your sig, an IRSP member's quote on your profile, your Bebo is full of IRSP images and nearly every thread you post in involves the IRSP in some shape or form... :rolleyes:)

Sorry if I appeared defensive, I'm just sick of this crap (which in my experience only seems to exist on message boards) that anyone who believes that the Protestant working-class can be won to Socialism is an apologist for Imperialism, or a pacifist, or a gas-and-waterworks socialist.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by Permanent [email protected] 27, 2007 06:24 pm
However did I make that mistake? (Seeing as you have an IRSP board in your sig, an IRSP member's quote on your profile, your Bebo is full of IRSP images and nearly every thread you post in involves the IRSP in some shape or form... :rolleyes:)

Sorry if I appeared defensive, I'm just sick of this crap (which in my experience only seems to exist on message boards) that anyone who believes that the Protestant working-class can be won to Socialism is an apologist for Imperialism, or a pacifist, or a gas-and-waterworks socialist.
That sig is of the starry plough initiative which is non-aligned and has members from all sections of the republican socialist tradition. I am a republican socialist,the IRSP have been pushing this brand of Republicansim for years,it would be a bit weird if i didnt have IRSP related material or people associated with my online activities.

I do believe the protestant working class can be won to socialism,i just dont think the way to do it is to not talk about th border. Thats my personal view,i wasnt having a go at you or your party.

[Brady]

Originally posted by Sir Aunty [email protected] 27, 2007 05:07 pm
I think that there are protestant socialists (the PUP, as much as i believe that they're the only unionist party who've made any sense over the last 10 years, don't really count) who are wary of bringing up the issue of British imperialism especially if they've been brought up in a staunchly unionist environment. Unless they analyse the situation (I'm talking particularly about young socialist who don't have the experience yet to have fully fledged ideas) they will also be uneasy about calling for a United Ireland because they have been brought up accepting British rule as a good thing.
This is just about spot on. I am a Protestant who wants a 32 county socialist republic, yet when I speak of my political views to people I know I stop short of attacking the British presence and the border. My dad is a bit left of centre and might understand but none of the rest would. Does this make me a coward and a hypocrite? Probably, but nobody wants to be shunned by their family and friends and this is a very sensitive issue. Hopefully it will all come out in good time.

In my opinion a united Ireland is the easy part. Its inevitable. Socialism on the other hand is the big problem, especially while the South continue to gloat about their 'booming celtic tiger economy'. God am I sick of hearing that phrase...

[redflag32]

Originally posted by Brady+May 27, 2007 07:42 pm--> (Brady @ May 27, 2007 07:42 pm)
Sir Aunty [email protected] 27, 2007 05:07 pm
I think that there are protestant socialists (the PUP, as much as i believe that they're the only unionist party who've made any sense over the last 10 years, don't really count) who are wary of bringing up the issue of British imperialism especially if they've been brought up in a staunchly unionist environment. Unless they analyse the situation (I'm talking particularly about young socialist who don't have the experience yet to have fully fledged ideas) they will also be uneasy about calling for a United Ireland because they have been brought up accepting British rule as a good thing.
This is just about spot on. I am a Protestant who wants a 32 county socialist republic, yet when I speak of my political views to people I know I stop short of attacking the British presence and the border. My dad is a bit left of centre and might understand but none of the rest would. Does this make me a coward and a hypocrite? Probably, but nobody wants to be shunned by their family and friends and this is a very sensitive issue. Hopefully it will all come out in good time.

In my opinion a united Ireland is the easy part. Its inevitable. Socialism on the other hand is the big problem, especially while the South continue to gloat about their 'booming celtic tiger economy'. God am I sick of hearing that phrase... [/b]
Its very brave of you to hold those views if you live in a loyalist area mate,fair play to ye, your spot on about the celtic tiger phraze,what a sham. All it is is foriegn investment,when they realize they can get it done cheaper elsewhere they will all leave.

I dont want to sound as though i dont think the protestant people should be brought into the struggle for socialism in Ireland,i even set up a small forum once to try and draw revolutionary protestants in for debate,but it failed drastically.Its just my opinion that to approach them without mentioning imperialism and its effects on workng class unity would do them a greater diservice than anything.

This post was to find out from those who think its best not to bring up the issue of the border, why they favour this tactic. Its not ment to be confrontational,im just curious.

[sexyguy]

The Brits could not defeat the republican nationalists. The Brits had to negotiate. This is the result. ”Make it look like the IRA didn't win”. They did. Now the revolutionary communists can stop moaning from their own ’peaceful coexistence’ compromises about being marginalized by nationalism and get on with the class struggle.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 12:16 am
The Brits could not defeat the republican nationalists. The Brits had to negotiate. This is the result. ”Make it look like the IRA didn't win”. They did. Now the revolutionary communists can stop moaning from their own ’peaceful coexistence’ compromises about being marginalized by nationalism and get on with the class struggle.
How did the IRA win exactly? Teir objective of getting the British out of Ireland failed. The PSF strategy has secured the union with Britian,taken away political status for prisoners which basically is the legetimacy for the irsh struggle and also put a rascist bigot into power (paisley). Socialists are back to square one,sectarianims is as rife as when it was at the begining of the troubles and the union still exsists. Untill imperialism is smashed we can never have a unity of workers in Ireland.

[Sir Aunty Christ]

We use the words "Protestant" and "Catholic" too much in Ireland. In my last post I was drawing from my own experience but I don't consider myself a protestent; I'm an atheist who just happens to have a Protestant family background. Even that's misleading as - with the exception of my Grandmother on my mum's side - none of my Grandparents are churchgoers, my Dad was born again but but died again when he was a teenager and my Mum only continued going to church (taking me with her) until I was 3 years old because she didn't want a row with my Granny. It's more correct to say that I have a unionist family background.

The words "Protestant" and "Catholic" are only labels we use to distinguish "us" from "them". It&#39;s like the old joke ( <_< ) where two boys are walking home from school, one tells the other he&#39;s a Jew and the other says "Yeah but are you a Protestant Jew or a Catholic Jew?"

On the other hand, you can&#39;t ignore the Protestant/Catholic issue. James Craig said that Northern Ireland was "A Protestant state for a Protestant people" (that&#39;s a misquote but a snappy one) so class consciousness needs to be raised in the Protestant working class before anything can happen. If this happens then they will see the lunacy of the existence of the border. The problem is not so much with the British but with the unionist minority on the island who couldn&#39;t accept the Dominion status that was offered several times until 1921. If that had occurred then probably events would have panned out the way they did (Irish independance in 1949) but with the six counties as part of a united Ireland. It would have been imperfect but at least there&#39;d be a basis for working class unity.

[Sir Aunty Christ]

...I even set up a small forum once to try and draw revolutionary protestants in for debate,but it failed drastically.

What did happen to those forums. The last one seems to have gone offline.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by Sir Aunty [email protected] 28, 2007 11:25 am

...I even set up a small forum once to try and draw revolutionary protestants in for debate,but it failed drastically.

What did happen to those forums. The last one seems to have gone offline.
The CCWDf (cross community working class debate forum) was a very basic and small forum but it had the best intentions,it drew in id say one or two socialist "protestants" (i understand your above post,i hate using these terms myself) It got attacked by loyalists and basically wasnt getting any traffic or debate of the kind we wanted so we pulled it. The forum im admin on at the moment is a republican socialist one but we try to encourage "protestant" socialists there,we know republican socialism is not religious based and that many leading republicans were protestant but its hard to draw people from that tradition into the forum.we have a section in the education part of the forum dedicated to ulster scots tradition,we see this culture as equal to the irish one and hopefull with this acceptence we may get some "protesant" socialst posters,even if they dont agree with us.

[Lark]

I think its because you&#39;d seem ridiculous.

Seriously, the british government has put it in print, they have no selfish or strategic interest in northern ireland or anywere else in ireland, that&#39;s the opposite of imperialism if you ask me.

You might as well talk about english imperialism in Scotland or Wales and in all honesty devolution is all the recognition of national or cultural identity that&#39;s needed if you ask me.

As someone who lives in the north coast of ireland and doesnt feel any particular attachment to either westminister or dublin I&#39;m not anxious for either to make decisions for people in northern ireland and I dont think that dublin rule would end unionist or protestant sectarianism it would only prolong it and preserve it for years and years to come.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 05:28 pm


You might as well talk about english imperialism in Scotland or Wales and in all honesty devolution is all the recognition of national or cultural identity that&#39;s needed if you ask me.

As someone who lives in the north coast of ireland and doesnt feel any particular attachment to either westminister or dublin I&#39;m not anxious for either to make decisions for people in northern ireland and I dont think that dublin rule would end unionist or protestant sectarianism it would only prolong it and preserve it for years and years to come.

You might as well talk about english imperialism in Scotland or Wales and in all honesty devolution is all the recognition of national or cultural identity that&#39;s needed if you ask me.

Britian has an interest in keeping these places loyal if you ask me, they have the european community to think of,how do you think they would feel if Britian was allowing rebellion on its own doorstep.I agree imperialism has changed,its now a case of globalisation,and in regards this i think Britian do want to hold onto the 6 counties and Scotland and Wales. I believe it has an economic interest,even if it isnt as obvious as it once was.


As someone who lives in the north coast of ireland and doesnt feel any particular attachment to either westminister or dublin I&#39;m not anxious for either to make decisions for people in northern ireland and I dont think that dublin rule would end unionist or protestant sectarianism it would only prolong it and preserve it for years and years to come.

I agree,Dublin rule would only make the problem worse. Unification has to be done on a workers rule basis,nothng else will work or do.

[sexyguy]

Untill imperialism is smashed we can never have a unity of workers in Ireland.
Well that is certainly true everywhere.


The IRA forced the Brits to the negotiate by armed struggle. Flattening the centre of Manchester etc. The capitalist interests (insurance companies) had simply had enough so they “negotiated with terrorists”. But how could a British government be ’seen’ to concede “power sharing” with bag of explosives under the table? It would have been the laughing stock of the world. It would have given the “green light” to everyone to take a pop at them. The long elaborate face-saving dance (with IRA approval) has been to mask British imperial retreat.

All the “cross boarder” institutions have been in place and running for years. If we think about it, the mighty British army was never going to be running for the boats in some repeat of Dunkirk, taking incoming from 600 odd IRA men. But as the British generals kept telling their government. “We can’t beat them,”-” they have all the sinews of war.”

[Lark]

Britian has an interest in keeping these places loyal if you ask me, they have the european community to think of,how do you think they would feel if Britian was allowing rebellion on its own doorstep.I agree imperialism has changed,its now a case of globalisation,and in regards this i think Britian do want to hold onto the 6 counties and Scotland and Wales. I believe it has an economic interest,even if it isnt as obvious as it once was.


You&#39;re kidding right?

That&#39;s pretty text book but look at the reality for a second, what economic interests are there?

The ship yards have closed down, Northern Ireland is just one big drain on UK tax revenues they could be spending on something else.

As for the EU, you think the brits care? I dont think they care what the EU thinks and I sure dont think the EU is fixing for a take over of the UK it if cant maintain its internal integrity.


I agree,Dublin rule would only make the problem worse. Unification has to be done on a workers rule basis,nothng else will work or do.


Well if that means uniting the peoples of ireland like it said in the peace accords then sure.

[Lark]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 07:14 pm

Untill imperialism is smashed we can never have a unity of workers in Ireland.
Well that is certainly true everywhere.


The IRA forced the Brits to the negotiate by armed struggle. Flattening the centre of Manchester etc. The capitalist interests (insurance companies) had simply had enough so they “negotiated with terrorists”. But how could a British government be ’seen’ to concede “power sharing” with bag of explosives under the table? It would have been the laughing stock of the world. It would have given the “green light” to everyone to take a pop at them. The long elaborate face-saving dance (with IRA approval) has been to mask British imperial retreat.

All the “cross boarder” institutions have been in place and running for years. If we think about it, the mighty British army was never going to be running for the boats in some repeat of Dunkirk, taking incoming from 600 odd IRA men. But as the British generals kept telling their government. “We can’t beat them,”-” they have all the sinews of war.”
I dont believe any of that, I think that developments on the national and international stage in the intelligence communities and spy networks had more to do with the resolution of the NI conflict than anything else.

I&#39;ll bet when the final history is available to all there&#39;s going to be some crazy "The man who was last thursday" or "The secret agent" style intriguing come out were by MI5, Forces Intel., CIA etc. etc. have all had a share of handling, recruiting, managing the whole conflict. All the "steak knife" stuff is only the tip of the ice berg.

I also think that the British knew they couldnt commit to developing troubles in the middle east and elsewere or remain allied with the Americans in their wars year on year when all their military and intel spending was concentrated on northern ireland.

Finally, and if you check the UK Samizdat blogs on why AQ is different you&#39;ll get a good picture of this, the republicans had been in a long transition from gun fighting to straight politics, they had clear objectives and goals to negotiate, no vagaries or misty eyed idealism and demonstrated that they could "switch it off" that they had a command and control structure that worked perfect and could maintain integrity without any splinter groups of significant size emerging. That&#39;s why the republicans arent getting any million pound kick backs to placate them like the loyalist groups.

[sexyguy]

Well ok, but it all adds up to the same thing. They had to get out and the IRA knew it and forced them to start the difficult process of tackling the unionists fascist starlet. And economic inducement for the “no surrender” northern bourgeoisie was the key = lots of grants and preferential consideration on cross boarder trade and redevelopment contracts.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 07:52 pm

Britian has an interest in keeping these places loyal if you ask me, they have the european community to think of,how do you think they would feel if Britian was allowing rebellion on its own doorstep.I agree imperialism has changed,its now a case of globalisation,and in regards this i think Britian do want to hold onto the 6 counties and Scotland and Wales. I believe it has an economic interest,even if it isnt as obvious as it once was.


You&#39;re kidding right?

That&#39;s pretty text book but look at the reality for a second, what economic interests are there?

The ship yards have closed down, Northern Ireland is just one big drain on UK tax revenues they could be spending on something else.

As for the EU, you think the brits care? I dont think they care what the EU thinks and I sure dont think the EU is fixing for a take over of the UK it if cant maintain its internal integrity.


I agree,Dublin rule would only make the problem worse. Unification has to be done on a workers rule basis,nothng else will work or do.


Well if that means uniting the peoples of ireland like it said in the peace accords then sure.
The Brits know that the Irish question has to be settled on their terms,any revolt or upset in the 6 counties could trigger a socialist revolution. The 6 counties may be a drain on them in relation to taxes etc..,im not disputing that,but their are other economic interests,im mainly talking about the economic system of capitalism. They dont want to rock the foundations in Ireland,therefore they have to keep the Irish problem moderate,this is why they are pushing SF as the leaders of that struggle,they have moderated them over the years and are now drawing them into their system.

It is my belief that it would be impossible to unite Ireland under capitalism,simply because it relies on the division of the workers to survive (sectarianism) and while this sectarianism survives you cant hope to even talk about a united capitalist ireland. the cause of this sectarianism is the British presence so the class and national struggles should be faught side by side. Im not talkign about armed struggle here either,progressive working class politics and an honest approach to the protestant workers is the way to go in my opinion.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by Lark+May 28, 2007 08:01 pm--> (Lark @ May 28, 2007 08:01 pm)
[email protected] 28, 2007 07:14 pm

Untill imperialism is smashed we can never have a unity of workers in Ireland.
Well that is certainly true everywhere.


The IRA forced the Brits to the negotiate by armed struggle. Flattening the centre of Manchester etc. The capitalist interests (insurance companies) had simply had enough so they “negotiated with terrorists”. But how could a British government be ’seen’ to concede “power sharing” with bag of explosives under the table? It would have been the laughing stock of the world. It would have given the “green light” to everyone to take a pop at them. The long elaborate face-saving dance (with IRA approval) has been to mask British imperial retreat.

All the “cross boarder” institutions have been in place and running for years. If we think about it, the mighty British army was never going to be running for the boats in some repeat of Dunkirk, taking incoming from 600 odd IRA men. But as the British generals kept telling their government. “We can’t beat them,”-” they have all the sinews of war.”
I dont believe any of that, I think that developments on the national and international stage in the intelligence communities and spy networks had more to do with the resolution of the NI conflict than anything else.

I&#39;ll bet when the final history is available to all there&#39;s going to be some crazy "The man who was last thursday" or "The secret agent" style intriguing come out were by MI5, Forces Intel., CIA etc. etc. have all had a share of handling, recruiting, managing the whole conflict. All the "steak knife" stuff is only the tip of the ice berg.

I also think that the British knew they couldnt commit to developing troubles in the middle east and elsewere or remain allied with the Americans in their wars year on year when all their military and intel spending was concentrated on northern ireland.

Finally, and if you check the UK Samizdat blogs on why AQ is different you&#39;ll get a good picture of this, the republicans had been in a long transition from gun fighting to straight politics, they had clear objectives and goals to negotiate, no vagaries or misty eyed idealism and demonstrated that they could "switch it off" that they had a command and control structure that worked perfect and could maintain integrity without any splinter groups of significant size emerging. That&#39;s why the republicans arent getting any million pound kick backs to placate them like the loyalist groups. [/b]
Id gree with you on this 100%

[Cheung Mo]

...If there&#39;s a socialist revolution in Ireland, SF and their corporate masters will be standing arm and arm with loyalists raining bullets down on the people of the Emerald Isle

[sexyguy]

I&#39;ll bet when the final history is available to all there&#39;s going to be some crazy "The man who was last thursday" or "The secret agent" style intriguing come out were by MI5, Forces Intel., CIA etc. etc. have all had a share of handling, recruiting, managing the whole conflict. All the "steak knife" stuff is only the tip of the ice berg.



Are you saying that imperialist goons were running the IRA and its war for thirty years? Why would they do that?


Come on then Lark, got any answers?

[Lark]

Originally posted by redflag32+May 28, 2007 09:05 pm--> (redflag32 @ May 28, 2007 09:05 pm)
[email protected] 28, 2007 07:52 pm

Britian has an interest in keeping these places loyal if you ask me, they have the european community to think of,how do you think they would feel if Britian was allowing rebellion on its own doorstep.I agree imperialism has changed,its now a case of globalisation,and in regards this i think Britian do want to hold onto the 6 counties and Scotland and Wales. I believe it has an economic interest,even if it isnt as obvious as it once was.


You&#39;re kidding right?

That&#39;s pretty text book but look at the reality for a second, what economic interests are there?

The ship yards have closed down, Northern Ireland is just one big drain on UK tax revenues they could be spending on something else.

As for the EU, you think the brits care? I dont think they care what the EU thinks and I sure dont think the EU is fixing for a take over of the UK it if cant maintain its internal integrity.


I agree,Dublin rule would only make the problem worse. Unification has to be done on a workers rule basis,nothng else will work or do.


Well if that means uniting the peoples of ireland like it said in the peace accords then sure.
The Brits know that the Irish question has to be settled on their terms,any revolt or upset in the 6 counties could trigger a socialist revolution. The 6 counties may be a drain on them in relation to taxes etc..,im not disputing that,but their are other economic interests,im mainly talking about the economic system of capitalism. They dont want to rock the foundations in Ireland,therefore they have to keep the Irish problem moderate,this is why they are pushing SF as the leaders of that struggle,they have moderated them over the years and are now drawing them into their system.

It is my belief that it would be impossible to unite Ireland under capitalism,simply because it relies on the division of the workers to survive (sectarianism) and while this sectarianism survives you cant hope to even talk about a united capitalist ireland. the cause of this sectarianism is the British presence so the class and national struggles should be faught side by side. Im not talkign about armed struggle here either,progressive working class politics and an honest approach to the protestant workers is the way to go in my opinion. [/b]
I dont believe for an instance that anything would trigger a socialist revolution in either the six counties or the rest of Ireland, socialist and communist groups are very and unpopular, usually just the usual suspects of students or people who&#39;re carrying on family traditions, even with popular causes like proposed water charges no ones drawn to support them.

I also very much doubt that sectarianism is anything to do with the British prescence, what prescence BTW? A lot of the fortified bases are closed or empty now, there isnt any army patrols and policing has to a great extent normalised, were it hasnt its because its dealing with psychotic CHAVs the like of which you&#39;d be hard pressed to find anywere else (recreational rioting?&#33; WTF?&#33;).

If sectarianism was something the British were the sole beneficiary of or author of it would be a feature of the rest of the UK, its not, unless you count Scotland, in Scotland or Northern Ireland its very much home grown, largely for what pleasure there is in hating but also because paramilitaries livelihoods rest upon it too.

[Lark]

Originally posted by Cheung [email protected] 28, 2007 09:56 pm
...If there&#39;s a socialist revolution in Ireland, SF and their corporate masters will be standing arm and arm with loyalists raining bullets down on the people of the Emerald Isle
Like I said there wont be any socialist revolution, socialism couldnt be further from everyones minds, SF arent the worst example of corporate whores either and there are socialists who are also loyalist but peoples identities at the end of the day are less to do with their status either as consumers or produces and more to do with who they hate the most.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by Lark+May 29, 2007 02:05 am--> (Lark @ May 29, 2007 02:05 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 09:05 pm

[email protected] 28, 2007 07:52 pm

Britian has an interest in keeping these places loyal if you ask me, they have the european community to think of,how do you think they would feel if Britian was allowing rebellion on its own doorstep.I agree imperialism has changed,its now a case of globalisation,and in regards this i think Britian do want to hold onto the 6 counties and Scotland and Wales. I believe it has an economic interest,even if it isnt as obvious as it once was.


You&#39;re kidding right?

That&#39;s pretty text book but look at the reality for a second, what economic interests are there?

The ship yards have closed down, Northern Ireland is just one big drain on UK tax revenues they could be spending on something else.

As for the EU, you think the brits care? I dont think they care what the EU thinks and I sure dont think the EU is fixing for a take over of the UK it if cant maintain its internal integrity.


I agree,Dublin rule would only make the problem worse. Unification has to be done on a workers rule basis,nothng else will work or do.


Well if that means uniting the peoples of ireland like it said in the peace accords then sure.
The Brits know that the Irish question has to be settled on their terms,any revolt or upset in the 6 counties could trigger a socialist revolution. The 6 counties may be a drain on them in relation to taxes etc..,im not disputing that,but their are other economic interests,im mainly talking about the economic system of capitalism. They dont want to rock the foundations in Ireland,therefore they have to keep the Irish problem moderate,this is why they are pushing SF as the leaders of that struggle,they have moderated them over the years and are now drawing them into their system.

It is my belief that it would be impossible to unite Ireland under capitalism,simply because it relies on the division of the workers to survive (sectarianism) and while this sectarianism survives you cant hope to even talk about a united capitalist ireland. the cause of this sectarianism is the British presence so the class and national struggles should be faught side by side. Im not talkign about armed struggle here either,progressive working class politics and an honest approach to the protestant workers is the way to go in my opinion.
I dont believe for an instance that anything would trigger a socialist revolution in either the six counties or the rest of Ireland, socialist and communist groups are very and unpopular, usually just the usual suspects of students or people who&#39;re carrying on family traditions, even with popular causes like proposed water charges no ones drawn to support them.

I also very much doubt that sectarianism is anything to do with the British prescence, what prescence BTW? A lot of the fortified bases are closed or empty now, there isnt any army patrols and policing has to a great extent normalised, were it hasnt its because its dealing with psychotic CHAVs the like of which you&#39;d be hard pressed to find anywere else (recreational rioting?&#33; WTF?&#33;).

If sectarianism was something the British were the sole beneficiary of or author of it would be a feature of the rest of the UK, its not, unless you count Scotland, in Scotland or Northern Ireland its very much home grown, largely for what pleasure there is in hating but also because paramilitaries livelihoods rest upon it too. [/b]

I dont believe for an instance that anything would trigger a socialist revolution in either the six counties or the rest of Ireland, socialist and communist groups are very and unpopular, usually just the usual suspects of students or people who&#39;re carrying on family traditions, even with popular causes like proposed water charges no ones drawn to support them.

Just think how easy it is to have unrest in the 6 counties,remember whiterock or the free derry incident? Remember how little things triggered this unrest? Any talk of a united Ireland would have the loyalist bigots crawling out of the woodwork and opening their gunchests,im not saying it would end in revolution,im sayng the British state dont want the possibility even. Socialist groups are not as unpopular as you make out, Richard Boyd Barrette,a socialist for the people before profit campaign got mass support from the Dun laoghaire area during the election,he missed it by a few votes,he literally got thousands of votes,thats something coming from an open socialist.

You cant get away from the fact that Britian has got intrests in how the 6 counties pans out,to take the blame away from the British is to do the working class of Ireland a terrible diservice. Those interests have changed over the years,just as Britians foriegn policy has changed its way in how it bleeds money from the workers of countries it invades,just look at Iraq for proof that IMperialism/globalism still exsists.


I also very much doubt that sectarianism is anything to do with the British prescence

Sectarianism has been used through history by the British in all its colonies as a tool to divide the natives and weaken their ability to strike back. This has been proved and documented through history,to not put the blame of sectarinism in the 6 counties firmly at the door of the British state is highly wrong and dishonest. You are basially saying it is the people who are to blame then,you are portraying the Irish "problem" as two waring religious tribes,a tactic which has been used by the British in all its colonies also,id wonder who&#39;s interests youhave at heart if this is the line you are taking?


I also very much doubt that sectarianism is anything to do with the British prescence, what prescence BTW? A lot of the fortified bases are closed or empty now, there isnt any army patrols and policing has to a great extent normalised

All this means is that the tactic of normalisation has succeeded. Even the free state went through periods of normalisation,when the presence of the British was accepted or put up with. Cork which is now called "rebel county" was once the most loyal county to the thrown. The presence of the British is in the peace walls,the institutionalised sectarianism and bigotry,in the sectarian police force,in MI5,in its capitalist interests. Its there alright,and even if we are going through a period of normalisation it doesnt make it right.


were it hasnt its because its dealing with psychotic CHAVs the like of which you&#39;d be hard pressed to find anywere else (recreational rioting?&#33; WTF?&#33;).

Whats a chav? Is that the disadvantaged youth you are talking about? Im not going to get into anti-social behavour as its a bit off-topic but if you think the only reason the British remain is to police "chav&#39;s" your very mistaken.

Dont forget there were as many soldiers in Ireland as there was in Iraq up untill very recently,even after the war had stopped,years after it. Possibly those numbers still remain im not sure,thats the presence you obvously counldnt see?

[redflag32]

Originally posted by Lark+May 29, 2007 02:08 am--> (Lark @ May 29, 2007 02:08 am)
Cheung [email protected] 28, 2007 09:56 pm
...If there&#39;s a socialist revolution in Ireland, SF and their corporate masters will be standing arm and arm with loyalists raining bullets down on the people of the Emerald Isle
Like I said there wont be any socialist revolution, socialism couldnt be further from everyones minds, SF arent the worst example of corporate whores either and there are socialists who are also loyalist but peoples identities at the end of the day are less to do with their status either as consumers or produces and more to do with who they hate the most. [/b]
You cant be asocialist and believe in monarchy or imperialism mate,those who are loyalist and consider themselves socialist are as socialist as hitler was.

[Brady]

Redflag32, you say it will be impossible to unite Ireland under capitalism. I dont get that. Its most likely to come down to birthrate. The catholic population is estimated in some quarters to be well over 40% now. It continues to rise all the time and its my belief that we could be in for a referendum within 25 years. i dont see how the british could possibly prevent that even if they wanted to (and I personally dont believe they do have any interest in NI anymore.) They have constantly said the outcome of the six counties will be decided democratically by the six counties.

When that day comes I for one wont be celebrating because it will merely replace one ruling class with another. Socialism in Ireland appears to be as far from our grasp as ever. I dont like Dermot Ahern but I find it hard to disagree with his assessment, &#39;the youth of Ireland are too busy buying cars and houses etc to be tuned in to a party with marxist tendancies&#39; or some bluster to that effect.

I respect your optimism but I dont see any evidence in my own community, fair enough most of my mates are unionists and therefore by definition not socialists, but they are all working class and there just doesnt seem to be any hint of rebellion in the air. Most just want to get on with their lives and switch off when I start banging on about politics.

[redflag32]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29, 2007 10:55 pm
Redflag32, you say it will be impossible to unite Ireland under capitalism. I dont get that. Its most likely to come down to birthrate. The catholic population is estimated in some quarters to be well over 40% now. It continues to rise all the time and its my belief that we could be in for a referendum within 25 years. i dont see how the british could possibly prevent that even if they wanted to (and I personally dont believe they do have any interest in NI anymore.) They have constantly said the outcome of the six counties will be decided democratically by the six counties.

When that day comes I for one wont be celebrating because it will merely replace one ruling class with another. Socialism in Ireland appears to be as far from our grasp as ever. I dont like Dermot Ahern but I find it hard to disagree with his assessment, &#39;the youth of Ireland are too busy buying cars and houses etc to be tuned in to a party with marxist tendancies&#39; or some bluster to that effect.

I respect your optimism but I dont see any evidence in my own community, fair enough most of my mates are unionists and therefore by definition not socialists, but they are all working class and there just doesnt seem to be any hint of rebellion in the air. Most just want to get on with their lives and switch off when I start banging on about politics.

Redflag32, you say it will be impossible to unite Ireland under capitalism. I dont get that. Its most likely to come down to birthrate. The catholic population is estimated in some quarters to be well over 40% now. It continues to rise all the time and its my belief that we could be in for a referendum within 25 years. i dont see how the british could possibly prevent that even if they wanted to (and I personally dont believe they do have any interest in NI anymore.) They have constantly said the outcome of the six counties will be decided democratically by the six counties.

Im not saying its impossible or it wont happen,just that i find it very hard to believe it would happen. Dont forget the Unionists when you say it will come down to birthrate,they wont hand over the 6 counties that easy,it will mean another revolt which both states dont want,the reason the loyalists would revolt is because of the sectarianism,hence my opinion that untill we can somehow tackle sectarianism then we can never have a united ireland,even under capitalism.

We tackle sectarianism by showing the protestant working class the nature of imperialism and globalism,we face them honestly,not by trying to get their support by back door policies. Thats just dishonest and it doesnt face up to the real issue for divide,sectarianism.



I dont like Dermot Ahern but I find it hard to disagree with his assessment, &#39;the youth of Ireland are too busy buying cars and houses etc to be tuned in to a party with marxist tendancies&#39; or some bluster to that effect.

But isnt it ur job to sa to the youth that socialism isnt about taking away our wealth,its about making it work for the people equally.?


I respect your optimism but I dont see any evidence in my own community, fair enough most of my mates are unionists and therefore by definition not socialists, but they are all working class and there just doesnt seem to be any hint of rebellion in the air. Most just want to get on with their lives and switch off when I start banging on about politics.

Sadly its the case in most capitalist countries mate,but that doesnt mean we should give up&#33;

[Redmau5]

But isnt it ur job to sa to the youth that socialism isnt about taking away our wealth,its about making it work for the people equally.

Yes, but the point is most people do not care about wealth being shared equally. If they did then the socialist movement would be a great deal stronger. People care about their own cars, their own houses, their own careers and their own wealth.

[quirk]

I dont get that. Its most likely to come down to birthrate. The catholic population is estimated in some quarters to be well over 40% now. It continues to rise all the time and its my belief that we could be in for a referendum within 25 years. i

This is one of the myths being propagated by Sinn Fein. The problem with it is that the last two censuses have shown that the birth rate in both communities have evened out and thus the size of the catholic and protestant populations will remain the same relative to each other. This is also not taking into account that a lot of catholics especially the middle class would not vote for a united Ireland and the normalisation process if sucessful will only increase this number.

To those who say the the British have no intrests in Ireland and base this on the fact that the British said so I find it hard that anyone would take them at their word. If they have no intrests why are they building a new MI5 building in the north.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 28, 2007 05:28 pm
I think its because you&#39;d seem ridiculous.

Seriously, the british government has put it in print, they have no selfish or strategic interest in northern ireland or anywere else in ireland, that&#39;s the opposite of imperialism if you ask me.

You might as well talk about english imperialism in Scotland or Wales and in all honesty devolution is all the recognition of national or cultural identity that&#39;s needed if you ask me.

As someone who lives in the north coast of ireland and doesnt feel any particular attachment to either westminister or dublin I&#39;m not anxious for either to make decisions for people in northern ireland and I dont think that dublin rule would end unionist or protestant sectarianism it would only prolong it and preserve it for years and years to come.
It&#39;s a lot more complex than that. Thatcher personally opposed the letter saying that Britain had no selfish or strategic interests in Ireland and only agreed to not oppose it when it was made clear it was for public consumption and not actually British policy. In fact they&#39;re pursuing the opposite, and they&#39;re building one of the largest mi5 buildings ever in Ireland currently.

Recognising the national identity is exactly what the brits are doing - which is a largely successful ploy of replacing revolutionary anti-imperialist politics with identity politics. :(

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Permanent [email protected] 27, 2007 04:46 pm
We aren&#39;t pacifists you idiot, we take a principled Marxist position which is that we disagree with individual terrorism. We supported the setting up of cross-community worker&#39;s militias to oppose the British troops, and when this became unrealistic we still supported the right to self-defence for under-siege Catholic areas.

We don&#39;t ignore British Imperialism in Ireland since we were some of the first to call for the withdrawal of troops when they first arrived in the late 60s. But today, such a slogan would be pointless as the British ruling class wants out of Northern Ireland, which is simply a huge drain on their resources.

We believe on uniting the workers on common issues while promoting Socialism as the only means forward. This is not "gas-and-waterworks" Socialism, this is based on the Transitional Program of putting forward transitional, realistic, demands while linking these with a wider anti-capitalist perspective. It appears you are the one ignoring Connolly - a united capitalist Ireland will mean nothing but a different coloured flag. Sectarianism won&#39;t disappear overnight.

Personally I disagree with the IRSP on a number of issues but at least I don&#39;t start threads attacking them falsely.
what a very strange responce. you&#39;re taking this personally as if he directed this at you in particularly.

1) Redflag32&#39;s not an idiot, he asked a question which is very valid and at least Makeveli responded decently.

2) the british aren&#39;t one homogenous mass who all want out of Ireland, this is reductionist thinking in the extreme. in fact they&#39;re building up more of the security infrastructure. some wouldn&#39;t mind leaving, but don&#39;t care enough to face down their own reactionaries to do it (see Lenin&#39;s The British Liberals and Ireland for an example of how long this has been going on).

3) your transitional programme is exactly what Connolly called gas and waterworks socialism, pretending that anti-imperialism and a state based on a sectarian headcount can be ignored. This is in practice a summation of your party&#39;s position. Your party does say that imperialism is the source of sectarianism, and basically support a united Ireland, but have a dishonest approach to the protestant working class.

4) we oppose armed tactics that are divorced from mass struggle and mass support, which has been a miserable failure since the peace process began, however the PIRA and INLA&#39;s armed campaigns were not individual terrorism by the marxist defintion. As Trotsky said, after a war breaks out, assasinations, bombings and armed resistance are advisable tactics: "under conditions of civil war, the assassination of individual oppressors ceases to be an act of individual terror" (Leon Trotsky, Their Moral and Ours, New Park, 1968, p.46).

[redflag32]

So am i to take from this that those who avoid the border issue with Unionists in Ireland do so to keep the peace and hopefully gain their support and respect through bread and butter issues?

[Coggeh]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 07:21 pm
So am i to take from this that those who avoid the border issue with Unionists in Ireland do so to keep the peace and hopefully gain their support and respect through bread and butter issues?
Basically , uniteing the workers on class issues is much more important then falling short to republican propaganda of the Brits being evil .

I do accept the point that a united socialist Ireland would be alot better but have a full republic on its own would change nothing "but the colour of the flag and the accent of the rich"

When the workers united about the issue of water charges it was another stepping stone to uniting the class and more issues and fights will arise for the socialist movement to progress in the north .

[gilhyle]

With all due respect to the protestant working class, why is it that when it coms to this sector of the class there is a refusal to recognise either

a) that sections of the working class can be thoroughly reactionary because of some idea they hold and

b) that the protestant working class shows, and has long shown, clear signs of deeply reactionary and lumpenised political view

OK, in theory it is possible to unite the two parts of the class momentarily, but history shows that any such alliance is always fragile and temporary as long as the national question persists.

THose who emphasise the unity of the class as the precondition for fighting imperialism only do so as a slightly clever way to avoid fighting imperialism at all.

The harsh truth is this: just as the &#39;pied noir&#39; could never support algerian independence and it had to be won over their heads, the protestant working class will never support Irish independence- it must be won over their heads: if it is to be won at all.

Given that it must be won by defeating this reactionary bloc within the working class, it better be worth it. So we should constantly question whether it still is.

[Redmau5]

THose who emphasise the unity of the class as the precondition for fighting imperialism only do so as a slightly clever way to avoid fighting imperialism at all.

Fighting imperialism is not an end in itself. The fucking Taliban are fighting imperialism.


the protestant working class will never support Irish independence- it must be won over their heads: if it is to be won at all.

This is ridiculous. And if such a thing was won, how would the protestant working-class react? I would imagine something similar to the IRA campaign of the last 40 years. Do you suggest that once we form our 32-county socialist republic, we suppress the protestant working-class? Unionists in the north are no more reactionary than catholics in the north. So, catholics may want a united Ireland, but how many truly want a socialist republic? A united Ireland without socialism is worthless.

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 09:47 pm
With all due respect to the protestant working class, why is it that when it coms to this sector of the class there is a refusal to recognise either

a) that sections of the working class can be thoroughly reactionary because of some idea they hold and

b) that the protestant working class shows, and has long shown, clear signs of deeply reactionary and lumpenised political view

Just because the main political representatives of the protestant working class are fond of saying that all catholics go to hell and homosexuals are evil, they enjoy burning ppl out of their homes and they block funding for the Irish language doesn&#39;t mean they can&#39;t be won over to socialism. You obviously haven&#39;t read the transitional programme enuf times and/or you are a sectarian nationalist gangster. :P :P :D

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by [email protected] 02, 2007 10:23 pm

the protestant working class will never support Irish independence- it must be won over their heads: if it is to be won at all.

This is ridiculous. And if such a thing was won, how would the protestant working-class react? I would imagine something similar to the IRA campaign of the last 40 years. Do you suggest that once we form our 32-county socialist republic, we suppress the protestant working-class? Unionists in the north are no more reactionary than catholics in the north. So, catholics may want a united Ireland, but how many truly want a socialist republic? A united Ireland without socialism is worthless.
I don&#39;t think there would be the kind of armed opposition from Unionists in a 32 rep there was from republicans. It was primarily oppression that sustained republicanism, not ideology. to create a 32 county state it would have to be more secular than the northern one, ie not based on sectarian headcounts.

The largest orange march in the 26 counties is in Donegal every year, which is a predominately catholic and very gaelic county. the march goes off without contraversey every year. There&#39;s just little to no empirical evidence that unionists would resist a united ireland, a few headcases aside.



THose who emphasise the unity of the class as the precondition for fighting imperialism only do so as a slightly clever way to avoid fighting imperialism at all.

Fighting imperialism is not an end in itself. The fucking Taliban are fighting imperialism.

Not in the Marxist sense - there&#39;s actually a definition of what constitutes anti-imperialism and what is simply nationalism, going back to the time of Lenin. The Taliban are more accurately disgruntled ex-employees of the imperialists who&#39;ve fallen out of favour.

[gilhyle]

Originally posted by PRC&#045;UTE+June 04, 2007 07:11 pm--> (PRC-UTE @ June 04, 2007 07:11 pm)
[email protected] 02, 2007 09:47 pm
With all due respect to the protestant working class, why is it that when it coms to this sector of the class there is a refusal to recognise either

a) that sections of the working class can be thoroughly reactionary because of some idea they hold and

b) that the protestant working class shows, and has long shown, clear signs of deeply reactionary and lumpenised political view

Just because the main political representatives of the protestant working class are fond of saying that all catholics go to hell and homosexuals are evil, they enjoy burning ppl out of their homes and they block funding for the Irish language doesn&#39;t mean they can&#39;t be won over to socialism. You obviously haven&#39;t read the transitional programme enuf times and/or you are a sectarian nationalist gangster. :P :P :D [/b]
DOnt get me wrong, I would like to think you were correct. But history shows you are wrong. Every time any fragile unity across class lines is built, the cohesive sectarian culture splits it when ever the national question is raised. If anything, the good friday agreement only reinforces the sectarian divide since the assembly only makes sense as a sectarian institution.

Taking a broader international perrspective, it is not impractical that there would be hard core reactionary sections within the working class. As long as they form a minority, you dont wait for them. If they persist in their reactionary positions in the face of the radicalisation of the mass of workers - you smash them.

YOu cannot win the protestant working class to nationalism or to &#39;socialist republicanism&#39;, that is clear. That leaves three alternatives:

1. The British withdraw and abandon them; as it has done many of its native allies before; you then contain their physical response and seek to reconcile them to an independent state, while containing them. (that was the logic of the troubles from the 1970s-90s)

2. The fight against imperialism in Ireland becomes an historical irrelevance and history therefore eliminates this barrier for you (that is what those who put the unity of the class as a precondition of fighting imperialism really mean)

3 Nothin changes, nothing resolves, every thing goes on as before.

Take your pick.

[redflag32]

I think we are confusing Protestantism with Unionism. Sure you wont get many Unionists in a 32county socialist republic and they should be smashed,but protestantism is not unionism. There are catholic unionists and protestant republicans,religion doesnt play a part in the struggle and i think we should atleast try to use the correct terms (Unionism as apposed to protestantism and Republicanism as apposed to catholicism)

[Redmau5]

But why are we talking about the protestant working-class only when the catholic working-class is nearly as reactionary? Sure they want a &#39;United Ireland&#39;, but how many want genuine socialism?

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by gilhyle+June 04, 2007 08:50 pm--> (gilhyle @ June 04, 2007 08:50 pm)
Originally posted by PRC&#045;[email protected] 04, 2007 07:11 pm

[email protected] 02, 2007 09:47 pm
With all due respect to the protestant working class, why is it that when it coms to this sector of the class there is a refusal to recognise either

a) that sections of the working class can be thoroughly reactionary because of some idea they hold and

b) that the protestant working class shows, and has long shown, clear signs of deeply reactionary and lumpenised political view

Just because the main political representatives of the protestant working class are fond of saying that all catholics go to hell and homosexuals are evil, they enjoy burning ppl out of their homes and they block funding for the Irish language doesn&#39;t mean they can&#39;t be won over to socialism. You obviously haven&#39;t read the transitional programme enuf times and/or you are a sectarian nationalist gangster. :P :P :D
DOnt get me wrong, I would like to think you were correct. But history shows you are wrong. Every time any fragile unity across class lines is built, the cohesive sectarian culture splits it when ever the national question is raised. If anything, the good friday agreement only reinforces the sectarian divide since the assembly only makes sense as a sectarian institution.

Taking a broader international perrspective, it is not impractical that there would be hard core reactionary sections within the working class. As long as they form a minority, you dont wait for them. If they persist in their reactionary positions in the face of the radicalisation of the mass of workers - you smash them.

YOu cannot win the protestant working class to nationalism or to &#39;socialist republicanism&#39;, that is clear. That leaves three alternatives:

1. The British withdraw and abandon them; as it has done many of its native allies before; you then contain their physical response and seek to reconcile them to an independent state, while containing them. (that was the logic of the troubles from the 1970s-90s)

2. The fight against imperialism in Ireland becomes an historical irrelevance and history therefore eliminates this barrier for you (that is what those who put the unity of the class as a precondition of fighting imperialism really mean)

3 Nothin changes, nothing resolves, every thing goes on as before.

Take your pick. [/b]
I was actually agreeing with you, I thought you&#39;d pick up the sarcasm. tá bron orm a chara ;)

[gilhyle]

I retreat in shame for failing to see your tone. :o