PRC-UTE
7th July 2007, 19:30
The Plough
(Web site http://www.theplough.netfirms.com/)
Vol. 4- No 16
Saturday 7th July 2007
E-mail newsletter of the
Irish Republican Socialist Party
1) Editorial
2) Imperialism not neutral
3) Response to Sunday Times article.
4) IRSP Statements
5) The case of Róisín McAliskey
6) An interview on the Venezuelan revolution
7) From the media
a. The fire this time
Editorial
This edition carries a statement from two members of the IRSP who were named
in an article in the Sunday Times (Irish edition) on July 1st. The statement
speaks for itself and is set against a background where two members of the
IRSP in Waterford when being questioned by the Garda Special Branch were
told that they, the Special Branch saw no difference between membership of
the IRSP and the INLA. When our comrades confirmed they were members of the
IRSP they were charged with membership of the INLA.
Part of the reason for this is the coming together of republicans in a
united march at the grave of Wolfe Tone recently. This has obviously sent a
few shock waves among all those who have endorsed or supported the recent
British imposed settlement in the North. No doubt other republicans and
socialists are looking at ways to maximise opposition to the current
capitalist set up. The main article “Imperialism Not Neutral” states one
position. We would be glad to hear from others who might have a different
position.
Repression by state forces is a cross all republicans have to bear. If one
believes that the road we travel on is the right road then there is no need
to deviate when the state puts up a bloackade. Simply ask what would Seamus
Costello, TA power or Gino Gallagher have done and do likewise!
Imperialism not neutral
With the end of the Blair era in Britain there has been much praise heaped
on the former prime minister for the work he did in bringing “peace” to
the North of Ireland. Much of the newspaper comments have been based on a
false premise that Britain played a role in bringing two warring factions to
the peace table.
The British state has not been and will not be neutral in this. It has
always sided with the Unionists when they try to force more concessions from
Sinn Fein. It used the RUC/PSNI in this process. And it has always employed
dirty tricks. After all it is an imperialist power
It should be remembered that it was the police that raided Sinn Fein's
offices in 2002 and triggered the suspension of Stormont. Three years later,
the British state offered no evidence whatsoever to back up their charges,
and Dennis Donaldson, one of the accused, admitted to being a British spy
all along. Spies, double agents, lies and murders: British rule, ie the
mailed fist, has always been present, just below the surface, during the
peace process.
Nor has The Good Friday Agreement led to the community drawing closer
together. All the elected MLA’s have to register as Protestant, Catholic or
Other, and important legislation, including the status of the union with
Britain, has to command support from each community. In other words, it
entrenches the Orange veto against a united Ireland.
All of the above is well recognised by republicans. Even some socialists
recognise it tho’ there are many in organisations that proclaim themselves
the vanguard of the working class who in practice deny the reality of
Imperialism. They never take up issues that could in any way be seen as
republican even when these issues involve democratic rights such as the
right to organise politically.
Recently the IRSP in the South of Ireland has come under attack from
political policing. False charges of INLA membership have been laid against
two IRSP members in an effort to crush the growth of our party. False
stories have been printed in the media about non existing INLA activity in
an attempt to get the INLA ceasefire de-recognised by the Free state
Government. The IRSP wait patiently for the so called far left to jump in
defence of our right to organise. It will be a long wait.
What many on the left fail to recognize that the major contradiction in
Ireland is the continued existence of the national question. The denial of
full self-determination by Britain using the fears of the mainly unionist
people in the north as a bulwark against the completion of the national
struggle is the fundamentally main contradiction. The ruling class in the
South while aware of this have no desire to see the issue of the national
question raise its head because what it needs most of all is stability.
Stability means profits for the capitalist class. That is why Bertie Ahearn
worked so hard with Blair to forge a settlement that would effectively
emasculate the main body fighting for the completion of the national
question, the provisional IRA. At the same time he made sure that the so
called ‘republican” credentials of Fianna Fail were to the fore so that they
could not be outflanked by Sinn Fein (provisional). Both Ahearn and his
designated successor as leader of Fianna Fail, Brian Cowen, are perceived to
be “strong” on the republican issue.
But saying that does not change anything. We now have a settlement of sorts
in the North that has taken the pressure from the British. The power
–sharing regime of Sinn Fein and the DUP is inherently unstable. Of course
it will not collapse tomorrow for they both need each other if they are to
retain power. The vast majority of people on the island probably think that
the “settlement “ in the North will work and that things can only get
better. There is little chance of that.
British interest rates have just gone up to 5.75% adding more to the
mortgages many have to pay out monthly. This at a time when first time
buyers have been priced out of the housing market by property speculators
buying all round them with a view to buy to let. Traditional housing has
been replace by apartment blocks discouraging family or community life.
The Northern Ireland executive will have to make a decision in Autumn on
water charges and many householders have now difficulty making ends meet to
pay the rates which are due to continuously rise over the next six years.
In the south of Ireland house prices fell for the third month in a row in
May. The average house price is now €304,166, 2.1% below where it was at the
start of this year. There have been eight rate rises already since the end
of 2005. The ECB base rate now stands at 4%, with most analysts predicting
4.5% at least by the end of the year.
A recent report by University College Dublin economist Morgan Kelly looked
at house prices across the OECD since 1970 and found that the higher house
prices rise, the harder the fall. He believes that real house prices give up
70% of what they gained in a boom during the bust that follows. That would
devastate many families
Figures from the Irish Exchequer showed that revenues from property-related
taxes such as capital gains tax and stamp duty, were €215m below target.
More than 1,000 foreign companies since the mid 1990’s have come to Ireland
and unemployment had fallen from 15% to 4.4%.. But Unions are demanding
even higher wages, as inflation rises above 5%. In the face of higher wages
and lower wage economies in Eastern Europe, those foreign companies could
soon leave.
According to data released by the Central Statistics Office (CSO), the
number of people signing on the Live Register (The Live Register does not
measure unemployment as it includes people on benefits who work part-time,
seasonally or are casually employed.) in June rose to its highest level in
almost three years,
The CSO report also found that the standard rate of unemployment is now at
its highest point since September 2003. Employers’ representative body IBEC,
said that the data showed the Irish labour market is beginning to weaken for
the first time in a number of years. The construction sector is likely to
feel the brunt of any slowdown.
IBEC economist Fergal O'Brien said: " the scale of the June increase
confirms that the Irish labour market is experiencing some deterioration."
For Ireland to continue to prosper under capitalism, it has to become less
reliant on consumer spending, and house price growth. But if people have
their backs to the wall, with their house prices falling and their home loan
payments rising, it’s going to be difficult to convince them not to keep
demanding higher wages.
Now there are some republicans who see the raising of class issues such as
these as a distraction, somehow taking away from the purity of the national
struggle. And on the other hand there are some who allegedly on the left,
who see the mere mention of the class struggle as some kind of retreat into
economism or the type of labourist politics epitomised by William Walker
that James Connolly argued so strongly against.
Lest there be any misunderstanding the issue of the national question in
Ireland is at heart a class question. The division of the country into two
separate states has encouraged sectarianism, seriously dividing the working
class and allowing the continued exploitation of all workers. When working
class people get more upset about the flying of flags, and the marching of
bands and banners past their estates than they do about the scandalous abuse
of cheap labour, the daily exploitation of both migrant and young workers
and the spread of landlordism and the selling off of state owned resources
then the reasons for partition are evident.
Since the foundation of the Northern state the republican strategy to end
partition has abysmally failed. Despite the existence of the most effective
guerrilla army in Western Europe the provisional movement failed in their
objective and had to make peace with the enemy whilst selling that peace as
a victory. The armed campaign of the INLA hampered by internal divisions,
spiked by British agents and without a coherent clear political direction
drifted into failure despite the heroic efforts of its genuinely
revolutionary members.
Many republicans are now beginning to come to terms with the scale of the
defeat suffered by anti-imperialists. Over the past years there has been an
increase in the number of organisations that call themselves republican.
Some dialogue and debate has taken place within and between these
organisations. The IRSP has always been willing to talk to anyone. But
talking is not the same thing as working with others in some new kind of
talking shop. Too often in the past, so-called revolutionary organisations
have spent more time examining their entrails than actually doing things to
persuade the people that their politics are right.
The way ahead lies in analysing the mistakes of the past, actively engaging
in all manifestations of discontent in society and above all fighting to
achieve leadership in the developing class conflicts that undoubtedly lie
ahead. Part of that will involve republican socialism reaching out to
progressive elements in both the catholic and protestant working classes. If
dialogue with other republicans is along these lines then well and good. If
on the other hand it is merely an attempt to recreate the old republican
model that serves the Irish working class so badly in the past then it is
doomed to failure and the IRSP should be very clear that that is a road we
have no intention of going down. Our task is to link the fight against the
sectarian Northern statelet and the subservient Free state to the struggle
for a fundamental transformation in pay, jobs, housing, social services, and
control in the workplace, opening the way to working class control and
power. Let us build a revolutionary party that fights for a workers'
republic in the many struggles against capitalism and British imperialism
that will emerge in the future.
(Gerry Ruddy)
Response to Sunday Times article.
In response to an article in the Sunday Times 8th July by John Mooney we
wish to state the following:
At no time did either of us portray to speak on behalf of INLA We are not
members of INLA. At no time did we infer that INLA were involved in a
dispute with criminals in Dublin
The reporter John Mooney called to Declan Duffy's home and asked him
if it were true that he had been informed by Gardai that his life was
under serious threat, Declan replied that it was. Declan gave a no comment
to a series of questions that Mooney put to him and closed the door.
Eddie Mc Garrigle was telephoned by John Mooney on two occasions.
Eddie confirmed to Mooney that there was always a level of tension between
republicans and drug gangs in the Dublin area and that this was nothing new,
however this has not resulted in violence. Eddie stated his belief that in
no way would he believe that INLA would resort to throwing hand grenades in
Dublin, He reminded him that it is public knowledge that drug gangs are
currently involved in disputes with each other and that this has seen many
gangland murders and grenade and pipe bomb attacks. Eddie pointed out that
whilst the Gardai were briefing journalists telling them INLA were involved
that in reality they knew this was a falsehood and that the person arrested
by them has no link whatsoever with the RSM. Eddie also stated that he had
been in many delegations to the Irish Government over the years and that
no-one from the Government had raised any concerns about the INLA
cease-fire, on the contrary Bertie Ahern has publicly praised the leadership
shown by the RSM.
Signed
Eddie Mc Garrigle
Declan Duffy
IRSP Ard Comhairle statement 20/6/07
The IRSP Ard Comhairle condemn the activities of Gardai special branch in
the Waterford area following the arrest and charging under section thirty of
two local IRSP members James Butler and John O’Donoghue.
The IRSP views these arrests as a crude attempt to disrupt and hinder the
continuing development of the IRSP in the twenty-six counties.
Ard Comhairle member Pól Little stated that the latest events highlighted
the draconian nature of the southern criminal justice system.
“This is clearly an attack on the IRSP as well as radical political
agitation within the 26 Counties.
Today we have two individuals who face substantial prison terms on the word
of a single Gardai officer, all because of their political orientation.”
“It is clear that Section 30 must be scrapped and we will be flagging this
plight of the two individuals with all appropriate Human Rights bodies.”
Statement Ends
Irish Republican Socialist Party
PSNI helicopter activity
Following recent low flying helicopter activity in the Andersonstown area of
west Belfast the Irish Republican Socialist Party has issued a statement
challenging the PSNI over their use of this crude method of surveillance.
Gerard Foster said "Low flying helicopters are renowned for the structural
damage they cause to property and in rural areas they have been known to
cause of the death of livestock. They have been used by British army
soldiers to intimidate the community in the past. We would then pose the
question as to why a PSNI helicopter would constantly circle a residential
area at low altitude for any length of time."
Mr. Foster continued "It's the view of the IRSP that British army
helicopters have been replaced with PSNI helicopters to further implement
the British policy of normalising their rule in Ireland."
Mr. Foster concluded by saying "Certainly if the arguments that we have
entered a new policing dispensation are to have any credit, the PSNI mustn't
pick up were the British army left off."
Friday 6 July, 2007. Statement ends.
The case of Róisín McAliskey
Róisín McAliskey is a 35 year old mother of two children aged ten and two.
She is the daughter of Civil Rights activist and former MP Bernadette
McAliskey. Róisín has been involved in community development work for nearly
20 years. She currently works with vulnerable young adults and survivors of
trauma and conflict.
Róisín was arrested in 1996 in relation to a mortar bomb attack carried out
by the Irish Republican Army on a British Army base in Osnabruck, Germany.
There is substantial evidence that Róisín was at home in Ireland at the time
of the attack. Within a few months of the attack a principal prosecution
witness was unable to identify her from a recent photograph. There was also
controversy over evidence gathered by German authorities.
Despite this Róisín was flown to London and detained for over a year but was
never charged with any offence. Although pregnant at the time of her arrest
in 1996 Róisín was categorised as a Category A prisoner and held in Holloway
Women’s Prison, before being transferred to the high security all male
prison at Belmarsh.
The detention of Róisín McAliskey was recognised by Amnesty International as
“cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment”
For Amnesty's Report on the detention of Róisín please click on link below:-
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEU...open&of=ENG-2U3 (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR450081997?open&of=ENG-2U3)
<http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR450081997?open&of=ENG-2U3>
In 1998 the then British Home Secretary Jack Straw refused the extradition
of Róisín on the grounds that it would be “unjust and oppressive” and Róisín
returned home to Ireland.
Subsequently in July 2000 the Solicitor General reported to the British
House of Commons as follows:
Mr Goggins: To ask the Solicitor-General if he will make a statement
concerning the possible prosecution of Róisín McAliskey.
The Solicitor-General: Further to the statement of the Home Secretary on 10
March 1998, Offical Report, column 133W, that he would not order the
extradition of Róisín McAliskey to Germany, the Crown Prosecution Service,
in accordance with this this country’s obligations under Article 7 of the
European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, has considered whether
to prosecute Róisín McAliskey in this country for the offences allegedly
committed in Germany in relation to the Osnabruck bombing of 28 June 1996.
The test applied by the Crown Prosecution Service is the test set out in the
Code for Crown Prosecutors that applies to all prosecution will be commenced
or proceeded with only if there is sufficient evidence to afford a realistic
prospect of conviction and that prosecution is in the public interest.
The Crown Prosecution Service, having taken the advice of Senior Treasury
Counsel, has concluded that there is not a realistic prospect of convicting
Miss McAliskey for any offence arising out of the Osnabruck bombing. It has
reached that conclusion having taken into account the available evidence and
the likely result of any argument that may be put forward by Miss McAliskey
that to prosecute her now would be an abuse of process.
The Law Officers have been consulted and we agree with the conclusion
reached by the Crown Prosectution Service.
“It is not usual for the Law Officers to make announcements concerning
consideration of individual cases. In this instance, the Home Secretary, in
a written reply, 20 March 1998, Offical report, column 742W, said that this
matter would be considered for prosecution in the United Kingdom. It is
right that the House should be informed of the outcome of those
considerations.”
On 21 May 2007 officers from PSNI, C.I.D and European Mutual Assistance Unit
sealed off access to the Cul-de-Sac where Róisín lives with her two young
children, and arrested her at 8.12am.
Róisín was handed a copy of a “European Arrest Warrant” issued by Dr Diemer,
the Prosecutor General at the Federal German Court of Justice on 12 October
2006. The warrant was received by SOCA (Serious Organised Crime Agency) on 6
November 2006.
No explanation has been given for the seven month delay.
Immediately a number of questions arise:
1. Why (given the authoritative statement by the Solicitor General that
there is no evidence which could sustain any charge) have the Germans abused
the Extradition Act (2003) to fast track Roisin’s removal to Germany?
2. Given the “fast track” purpose of the European Extradition Warrant,
why did it “disappear” in the UK from Nov 2006 to May 2007?
3. Given its “assisted disappearance”, for what reason and by whose
authority was it acted upon in May 2007?
http://www.marxist.com/interview-alan-wood...ution180607.htm (http://www.marxist.com/interview-alan-woods-venezuelan-revolution180607.htm)
<http://www.marxist.com/interview-alan-woods-venezuelan-revolution180607.htm
>
An interview with Alan Woods on the Venezuelan revolution today
By Humania del Sur
Monday, 18 June 2007
Q.John Riddell, in his review of your book “The Venezuelan Revolution, a
Marxist perspective”, wonders if a small Marxist current like the one you
lead can influence the course of events in the world and says that at least
you have the merit of going part of the way together with the Bolivarian
Revolution in Venezuela. How was this possible? How did you manage it? Did
they contact you? Tell us how your first meeting with Chavez was and how the
relation between the International Marxist tendency, the government of Hugo
Chávez and the sectors that support it are developing. Do you really believe
you can influence events in Venezuela in some way?
A.History shows that a small group with clear ideas can play a decisive role
in certain historical situations, while a big mass party with incorrect
ideas can be transformed in a given moment into a great zero. It is
sufficient to recall on the one hand the Bolshevik Party which, at the
beginning of 1917 was a small minority in Russia, and on the other hand the
collapse of the Social Democratic and Communist parties in Germany in 1933.
It is true that the Corriente Marxista Revolucionaria is as yet very small
in Venezuela, but we are very strong in ideas, and that in the last instance
is the only guarantee of success. I might add that it was precisely the
strength of our ideas that led to my first encounter with President Chávez,
who had read my book Reason in Revolt, which he liked and which he has been
so kind as to recommend on several occasions.
As to the influence we might have in Venezuela, that depends in part on the
work of the Venezuelan Marxists, in part on the experience of the masses. In
general the masses do not learn from books but from experience. But in a
revolution the masses learn more in one week than in a decade of normal
life. Lenin used to say that for the masses an ounce of experience is worth
a ton of theory - and he was a great theoretician.
The masses have already learnt many things in this decade of revolution.
They know how to distinguish their real friends from their enemies (even
when these wear a red shirt). We could put it this way: although the masses
may not know exactly what they want, they know full well what they do not
want. The development of consciousness continues: the influence of the
reformists is declining and that of the most revolutionary wing, together
with that of the Marxist tendency that I have the honour of representing is
growing.
Q.You have openly expressed your admiration for President Chávez. However,
you have said that you consider that the Bolivarian Revolution is
“incomplete”. What do you mean by this?
A.The Bolivarian Revolution is a revolution in the sense that Trotsky
explained in The History of the Russian Revolution, that is, a situation in
which the masses participate actively in politics and try to take their
destiny into their own hands and change society from the bottom. But it is
unfinished because it has not yet succeeded in expropriating totally the
oligarchy and the old state apparatus remains more or less intact. As long
as things continue like this, it cannot be said that the revolution is
irreversible. President Chávez once compared it to the myth of Sisyphus, who
was condemned to roll a heavy boulder to the top of a hill, at which point
it always rolled back to the starting-point. The problem is that if this
particular rock rolls backwards, it will crush a lot of people.
Trotsky once said: “truth and not lies is the motor-force of history”.
What, in your opinion, is the truth of the Bolivarian Revolution? And what
are the lies? Are we in the presence of a real transformation of Venezuelan
reality, heading for socialism of the xxi century or is it all a deception
that will end in the consolidation of a new political and economic elite
that has nothing in common with revolution or socialism?
The great truth is that in a revolution - that means also the Bolivarian -
in the end one class has to win and the other lose, and that throughout
history no ruling class has ever surrendered without a pitiless struggle.
The great lie consists in empty and vainglorious declarations to the effect
that the Bolivarian Revolution “is irreversible” and other such stupid and
irresponsible nonsense which merely attempts to deceive the people and lull
it to sleep instead of arousing it to struggle against the danger of
counter-revolution.
As for the so-called theory of socialism of the XXI century, I think it is
an attempt to distort the ideas of President Chávez and to divert the
process towards reformism. People like Heinz Dieterich are striving by all
means to water down the revolutionary message of the President and fill it
with a completely reformist one. They are opposed to nationalisations, they
preach reconciliation between the classes, that is, they are trying to teach
the tiger to eat lettuce. And they call this nonsense “realism”! I am
writing a book against the ideas of Dieterich and the reformists, and I hope
to make clear the difference between Marxism - the authentically
revolutionary theory - and this caricature.
Q.What other criticisms would you make of the Bolivarian Revolution, apart
from the fact that you consider it to be incomplete?
A.Some time ago Hugo Chávez asked me the same question. I replied in the
following way. Your revolution is a real source of inspiration for millions.
That is the most important thing. But it does have some weak points, for
example, the absence of a clearly defined programme and policy, and the lack
of politically educated cadres; in other words, the lack of a revolutionary
party, the lack of a revolutionary leadership.
It is true that later there have been attempts to remedy some of these
failings. For example, the President has proclaimed the socialist character
of the Revolution - something that our Tendency has been advocating from the
very beginning. But this idea is meeting with stubborn resistance from the
reformists and Stalinists. The battle is not yet won.
Q. What do you think of the criticisms of the Venezuelan opposition that the
President has displayed authoritarian attitudes and that his condition as a
military man does not favour the democratic rules of play? For example, what
is your opinion about his declared intention of remaining in power for an
unlimited term and his comments about a “peaceful but not unarmed”
revolution? Are socialism and democracy incompatible?
Why should they be? Socialism is democratic or it is nothing! Of course,
when I speak of democracy I do not refer to the vulgar caricature of
bourgeois democracy - which is only another name for the dictatorship of big
Capital. What democracy exists in the USA, where there are supposed to be
two parties that, as Gore Vidal explains very well, are really only one
party representing different wings of the bourgeoisie. In order to be
President of the USA one has to be a millionaire. What kind of a democracy
is that?
The protests of the Venezuelan opposition are pure hypocrisy. They have lost
the elections and referendums, one after another. They lost again last
December when Chávez obtained the biggest majority in the history of
Venezuela. And they cannot say that this was a fraud! These elections were
the most highly scrutinized in the history of the world! They were all out
there in Caracas, searching with a magnifying glass for even the smallest
evidence of fraud. If they had found any they would have shouted it from the
rooftops. But they did not find anything.
These elections provide a very clear mandate to the Bolivarian government -
a mandate for fundamental change in society. That is what the masses are
really demanding! Hugo Chávez must carry out the wishes of those who voted
for him, the workers and peasants, the poor people and the youth, ignoring
completely the howling of the counterrevolutionary opposition, which is
nothing but the mouthpiece of the corrupt and reactionary oligarchy and its
master in Washington. We must take drastic and urgent measures. It is high
time to carry out the expropriation of the oligarchy!
Q. Concerning the question of the media and information in Venezuela, ever
since Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías assumed the Presidency of the Republic in
December 1998, the government has been reducing the freedom of the press,
which is defined as “the guarantee by the government of freedom of
expression for citizens and associations, including those dedicated to the
collection and broadcasting of information” while strengthening the media
owned by the state, which are dedicated to the transmission of programmes of
an “ideological” character. Isn’t this contrary to human rights? Is
socialism against rights?
A. Come on, now! How can we speak of freedom of the media, of the means of
communication, when all these are owned by a handful of rich men like Rupert
Murdoch? The so-called freedom of expression in Britain and the USA is a
joke in very bad taste!
Of course, socialism must respect human rights. But let us start by
defending the rights of the overwhelming majority of the population who,
until now, never had any real rights or a voice to express their opinions.
What we should do is to nationalise the press, the radio and television, but
not leave these things in the hands of the state (we do not want a
totalitarian state as in the USSR) but to guarantee access to the media to
any party, social or trade union organization according to the number of
members, votes in elections, etc. they have. Thus, the PSUV would have
several daily papers and more than one TV station, and the owners of RCTV
could have a small monthly journal like El Militante which they would be
free to sell at the bus stops... That is to say, we would give the bourgeois
the same rights they give to us, neither more nor less.
Q. What do you think of the case of Radio Caracas Televisión, a company with
more than 50 years of history, which had its licence cancelled by the
government in May?
A. As far as RCTV is concerned, everybody knows that this was a
counterrevolutionary (“golpista”) station. If I were to criticize the
President, I would say he should have acted a lot sooner against this nest
of vipers. And he should not only have closed them down but he should have
arrested the bosses and put them on trial.
Yet again, the orchestrated campaign over this issue is just plain
hypocrisy. I can assure you that if a British TV company had attacked Blair
in the same way that this lot did to Chávez, advocating a coup and even the
assassination of the head of state, they would be in prison before their
feet could touch the ground. No! The problem here is not that we “have gone
too far”, as Heinz Dieterich and others think, but that we have been too
soft. For example, how many of the April 2002 conspirators are behind bars?
As far as I know, not one. This would not be the case in the USA, I can
assure you!
Q. Many chavistas are sceptical about the President’s appeal to form the
PSUV, because they fear that it may be an attempt to control and silence
internal dissent. What do you think about this? Is a single party an
instrument suitable for promoting a “revolution within the revolution” which
is what you support?
A. On the one hand, it is evident that the working class needs a political
party and also that the old parties that made up the MVR were very bad,
totally taken over by the bureaucracy and the reformists. Therefore, it
seems to me that the proclamation of the PSUV could be an important step
forward, but only on condition that it is a genuinely revolutionary party,
that is, a democratic and class party, controlled by the working class rank
and file and not just another bureaucratic apparatus for the careerists and
opportunists. Here also the presence of a strong Marxist tendency is
absolutely necessary.
Q. Your book on Venezuela has been translated into various languages,
including Urdu. This has made Chávez and the Bolivarian Revolution known in
countries like India and Pakistan. Do you really think that what is
happening in Venezuela is an example for the world? If so, why?
A. It is true that my book has been a great success because it fills a
vacuum. Unfortunately, a great part of the Left internationally has not
understood the significance of the Bolivarian Revolution, although this
situation is changing rapidly, as people begin to find out what is going on
in Venezuela. In all this a very important role has been played, and is
still being played, by our international campaign Hands off Venezuela.
Why is the Venezuelan revolution important for the rest of the world? Well,
in the first place, all this should not be happening! After the fall of the
USSR the bourgeoisie succumbed to a mood of euphoria. They spoke of the end
of socialism, the end of communism, of revolution, even the end of history.
Now Venezuela has turned all these delusions on their head! The Bolivarian
Revolution is like an echo of those famous last words of Galileo: “Eppur si
muove!” (And yet, it moves!).
In the last period capitalism has demonstrated that it is incapable of
satisfying the most basic necessities of the masses. On all sides we see
more hunger, more diseases, more misery, more wars. But there is also an
increasing reaction by the people. Classical physics says: every action
produces an equal and opposite reaction. That is also true in politics! The
mass movement increasingly tends to question the capitalist system - even in
the USA. And Venezuela offers a point of reference for these movements. That
is why the imperialists are hell-bent on destroying the Bolivarian
Revolution at all costs, because it gives an example to millions of
exploited and oppressed people in America and further afield.
In Venezuela there is a class struggle that has an increasingly sharp and
ferocious character. We still do not know how it will end. But we do know on
what side of the barricades we are! With the workers and peasants and
against the bourgeois, bankers and landowners! With the revolutionary youth
and the vanguard that wants to carry the revolution forward, striking hard
blows against the counter-revolutionaries, and against the timid reformists
and cowardly and treacherous bureaucrats!
If anyone had any doubt about whether we should support the Bolivarian
Revolution, it is only necessary to see the attitude of US imperialism,
which does not conceal its plans to overthrow Chávez and is backing the
counter-revolution. This detail is sufficient to convince anyone of the
necessity to rally to the defence of the Bolivarian Revolution. But in order
to defend it seriously, it is absolutely necessary to go further,
liquidating the economic power of the oligarchy. It is not sufficient to
talk about socialism; it is necessary to make it a reality! And this can
only be done when the working class takes power into its hands.
Once the working class takes power into its hands, the Bolivarian Revolution
will lose its ambiguous and indecisive character and will acquire an
irresistible strength, passing beyond the narrow national frontiers and
transforming itself rapidly into a continental revolutionary movement. The
conditions are more than ripe for this! Today there is not a single stable
bourgeois regime in all Latin America - from Tierra del Fuego to the Rio
Grande. The great vision of the Libertador, Simon Bolivar, of the
revolutionary unification of Latin America, would be feasible for the first
time. But it would only be possible in a Socialist Federation of Latin
America, which in turn would be the first step towards world socialism.
London, 6 June, 2007
[Note: to be published shortly in Revista Humania del Sur, Revista de
Estudios Latinoamericanos Africanos y Asiáticos de la Facultad de
Humanidades y Educación de la Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida -
Venezuela, http://www.saber.ula.ve/humaniadelsur/
<http://www.saber.ula.ve/humaniadelsur/> ]
FROM THE MEDIA
The fire this time
The government has been ineffectual in closing the country's vast poverty
gap
Sara Mampane has been waiting for the African National Congress to fulfil
its promise of a new home - what she calls a "proper house", where the only
corrugated iron is on the roof and the walls are made of brick - since the
party came to power with the collapse of apartheid 13 years ago.
The 43-year-old mother of three watched from her rickety two-room shack with
no electricity in a squatter camp on the edge of Mamelodi township as others
moved to one of the new box houses built by the government. She was content
to wait her turn and be grateful for what did arrive, principally access to
clean water and a health clinic for her children. But her patience snapped
last month when men in red boiler suits came to demolish her home.
The feared "red ants" descended on the camp to remove the thousands of
illegally built corrugated iron shacks that have spread out from the edge of
the township in recent years. The residents were so incensed that they
stoned one of the men to death and injured others, and set fire to four
trucks.
"They promised me a house but they say wait, wait, wait," said Ms Mampane.
"So I am waiting. But it is not right to come and knock down the house I
have before they build me a new one. This is what we expected from
apartheid, not from our own government. I think they have forgotten us."
Weeks of on and off rioting in Mamelodi over the demolitions and lack of
services have rekindled memories of the township as a hotbed of protest
against the apartheid regime two decades ago. Last week hundreds of angry
protesters threw up barricades and burned tyres in clashes with police. Last
month the residents set fire to local council offices.
The disturbances are not limited to Mamelodi. Hundreds of similar protests
have spread across South Africa, fuelled by anger at the slow pace of
change.
Thirteen years after the end of apartheid, the poverty gap in South Africa
remains among the largest in the world - second only to Brazil by some
measurements. More than 40% of South Africans live on less than eight rand
(59p) a day. More than one third of the working-age population is
unemployed.
But it is the evident wealth of others, mostly white but including a small
newly enriched black elite, that has contributed to bitter divisions within
the ANC over the government's economic strategy. The issue is expected to
dominate a party conference this week.
Time bomb
Some in the ANC are warning that the wealth gap is a time bomb for the
country and the party, which is losing touch with the mass of its voters and
"betraying the national democratic revolution" with too much focus on
creating a liberal business climate.
Trade unions are leading the attack on economic priorities they say have
principally benefited the emerging black elite, and the old white one, at
the expense of the poor. "It's like a doctor saying an operation has been
successful when the patient is dead," Zwelinzima Vavi, secretary general of
the Congress of South African Trade Unions, a partner in the ruling alliance
with the ANC, told a rally in the Free State this month.
Few deny that the ANC has taken significant strides toward reducing poverty.
According to figures released last week, the government has built more than
2m new homes since 1994, although the numbers of people living in squatter
camps has risen by half over the same period.
About 85% of households have access to fresh water, up from 61% when the ANC
came to power. More than 71% have inside toilets attached to the sewage
system, up from about 50%. More than 4m homes have been connected to mains
electricity over the same period, although the price of power has quadrupled
and many people have been cut off because they cannot pay the bills.
South Africa's minister of provincial and local government, Sydney Mufamadi,
has said the protests reflect the government's successes. "As we make
progress in some municipalities, the residents in other municipalities
become impatient: they expect their public representatives to deliver in the
same way as progress is made in other municipalities," he told a UN news
agency.
Unshared growth
The government's latest strategy, the accelerated and shared growth
initiative, seeks to halve poverty and unemployment by 2014 by continuing
the significant economic growth of recent years and creating millions of new
jobs.
Charles Meth, a respected researcher on poverty at Cape Town university,
says the government is working on "over-optimistic" predictions, and that
though economic growth is crucial it will take decades to eradicate endemic
poverty. "The treasury is driving an agenda that says growth is going to
rescue us," he says. "It's nonsense.
"Within the state there's a huge amount of tension over poverty policy. On
the one hand you've got the minister of social development, Zola Skweyiya,
very sensibly saying this is not going to be enough and we have to have some
kind of basic grant for those people who are going to be left out by these
anti-poverty policies and growth policies that you're looking at. The
cabinet rounds on him and says 'bollocks'."
The government concedes that though poverty has decreased since 2000, the
gap between rich and poor has not narrowed.
The poor can see it only too well. Where the fault line between the haves
and the have nots once ran almost exclusively along racial lines, the ANC's
policy of black economic empowerment has created a new class of super-rich
blacks driving the most expensive cars and living in mansions with servants
and swimming pools. Many of the new elite have links to the ruling party.
The policy's defenders say that it is forcing a shift in economic power to
the black majority that will trickle down to the poor. Some of its critics
say that all too often blacks have merely become the public face of white
interests.
Smuts Ngonyama, a former spokesman for President Thabo Mbeki asked to
explain why he received shares in a private company while working for the
government, said he did not join the struggle against apartheid to remain
poor. Tokyo Sexwale, one of the few ANC leaders to have declared he is
running to succeed Mr Mbeki, has also been forced to defend his
extraordinary accumulation of wealth.
The unions and ANC left have an uphill struggle to change the policy at this
week's party conference. The leadership wants an endorsement of a document
that Johannesburg's Centre for Policy Studies has described as so "bland,
uncritical and vague" that it leaves the impression that the ANC "just
doesn't care for the poor and socially marginalised groups".
But Max Sisulu, one of the party's economic policy strategists, says the ANC
is not disturbed by the criticism.
"We are not worried about differences. We welcome them," he says. "We can
only benefit from differences."
BEE bumbling: The rise of the new elite
The Black Economic Empowerment affirmative action policy to break the white
stranglehold on the economy is either the fast track to addressing past
wrongs or another get-rich-quick scheme in a country where a greed-is-good
culture pervades.
BEE's supporters say the shift in political power after apartheid is
compromised by continued white control of the economy. Companies with a
significant black stake control just 5% of the Johannesburg stock exchange.
Empowerment laws require larger white-owned businesses to sell a 25% stake
to black partners.
But BEE is also seen as just jobs for some of the ANC boys (and girls).
Critics say the policy has encouraged black people to set up companies that
serve no other purpose than to help white-owned firms meet their
obligations. There have been a number of scandals, perhaps most notably that
involving the woman known as the "Queen of BEE", Danisa Baloyi, who had to
resign from more than a dozen company boards after two people were arrested
on fraud allegations at one of the companies
Chris McGreal in Mamelodi Tuesday June 26, 2007 The Guardian
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/ <http://www.guardian.co.uk/> >
Back copies of the Plough can be accessed at
http://www.irsm.org/irsp/plough/ <http://www.irsm.org/irsp/plough/>
Please feel free to comment on the contents of the Plough. We welcome
political comments and criticisms. If you would prefer to receive the Plough
as an attachment please e-mail with heading “add attachment”. If you know of
anybody who might wish to receive the Plough please send his or her e-mail
address to [email protected] or [email protected]
If you wish to receive back copies of the “The Plough” Please e-mail”
to [email protected] < or [email protected] stateing which
numbers you wish.
To unsubscribe to the Plough please send e-mail entitled “unsubscribe” to
[email protected] or [email protected] It is the policy of
the Plough to acknowledge information and articles from other sources.
The Republican Socialist Youth Movement have re-launched their website. It
can be viewed at www.rsym.org. Republican Socialist Youth Movement.
www.rsym.org <http://www.rsym.org>
The Republican Socialist Youth Movement has produced a short video on the
situation concerning Shannon airport and its continued use by American
troops and the CIA. The video can be viewed at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH0WqJb95l8 .
Daly / Mc Namee Cumann Irish Republican Socialist Party Costello
House 392b Falls Road Belfast BT12 6DH 028 9032
1024 [email protected] http://www.irsm.org
For general enquiries: e [email protected] Join the IRSP here!
<http://www.angelfire.com/space/derryirsp/join.htm>
Subscribe to the bi-monthly “The Starry Plough/An Camchéachta”
P.O. Box 1981, Derry, BT48 8GX, Ireland.
THE VOICE OF REPUBLICAN SOCIALISM!
E-mail [email protected]
The Starry Plough
http://irsm.org/irsp/starryplough <http://irsm.org/irsp/starryplough>
IRSP: Pairtí Poblachtach Sóisialach na h-Éireann
http://irsm.org/ <http://irsm.org/>
James Connolly Society
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/
<http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/>
James Connolly Archive
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly
<http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly>
The Republican Socialist Forum from Derry IRSP is
http://rsmforum.proboards23.com/index.cgi
<http://rsmforum.proboards23.com/index.cgi>
Republican Socialist Online Merchandise - Website
A website that offers a central place to go on the Internet to find good
quality items with a distinct Republican Socialist theme. Proceeds from
sales from this effort go towards the IRSM and it’s various projects.
http://www.angelfire.com/folk/irishshop/index.html
<http://www.angelfire.com/folk/irishshop/index.html>
Donate to the IRSP:
Standing Order Form
<http://www.theplough.netfirms.com/Forms/Standing%20Order%20Form.pdf>
(Web site http://www.theplough.netfirms.com/)
Vol. 4- No 16
Saturday 7th July 2007
E-mail newsletter of the
Irish Republican Socialist Party
1) Editorial
2) Imperialism not neutral
3) Response to Sunday Times article.
4) IRSP Statements
5) The case of Róisín McAliskey
6) An interview on the Venezuelan revolution
7) From the media
a. The fire this time
Editorial
This edition carries a statement from two members of the IRSP who were named
in an article in the Sunday Times (Irish edition) on July 1st. The statement
speaks for itself and is set against a background where two members of the
IRSP in Waterford when being questioned by the Garda Special Branch were
told that they, the Special Branch saw no difference between membership of
the IRSP and the INLA. When our comrades confirmed they were members of the
IRSP they were charged with membership of the INLA.
Part of the reason for this is the coming together of republicans in a
united march at the grave of Wolfe Tone recently. This has obviously sent a
few shock waves among all those who have endorsed or supported the recent
British imposed settlement in the North. No doubt other republicans and
socialists are looking at ways to maximise opposition to the current
capitalist set up. The main article “Imperialism Not Neutral” states one
position. We would be glad to hear from others who might have a different
position.
Repression by state forces is a cross all republicans have to bear. If one
believes that the road we travel on is the right road then there is no need
to deviate when the state puts up a bloackade. Simply ask what would Seamus
Costello, TA power or Gino Gallagher have done and do likewise!
Imperialism not neutral
With the end of the Blair era in Britain there has been much praise heaped
on the former prime minister for the work he did in bringing “peace” to
the North of Ireland. Much of the newspaper comments have been based on a
false premise that Britain played a role in bringing two warring factions to
the peace table.
The British state has not been and will not be neutral in this. It has
always sided with the Unionists when they try to force more concessions from
Sinn Fein. It used the RUC/PSNI in this process. And it has always employed
dirty tricks. After all it is an imperialist power
It should be remembered that it was the police that raided Sinn Fein's
offices in 2002 and triggered the suspension of Stormont. Three years later,
the British state offered no evidence whatsoever to back up their charges,
and Dennis Donaldson, one of the accused, admitted to being a British spy
all along. Spies, double agents, lies and murders: British rule, ie the
mailed fist, has always been present, just below the surface, during the
peace process.
Nor has The Good Friday Agreement led to the community drawing closer
together. All the elected MLA’s have to register as Protestant, Catholic or
Other, and important legislation, including the status of the union with
Britain, has to command support from each community. In other words, it
entrenches the Orange veto against a united Ireland.
All of the above is well recognised by republicans. Even some socialists
recognise it tho’ there are many in organisations that proclaim themselves
the vanguard of the working class who in practice deny the reality of
Imperialism. They never take up issues that could in any way be seen as
republican even when these issues involve democratic rights such as the
right to organise politically.
Recently the IRSP in the South of Ireland has come under attack from
political policing. False charges of INLA membership have been laid against
two IRSP members in an effort to crush the growth of our party. False
stories have been printed in the media about non existing INLA activity in
an attempt to get the INLA ceasefire de-recognised by the Free state
Government. The IRSP wait patiently for the so called far left to jump in
defence of our right to organise. It will be a long wait.
What many on the left fail to recognize that the major contradiction in
Ireland is the continued existence of the national question. The denial of
full self-determination by Britain using the fears of the mainly unionist
people in the north as a bulwark against the completion of the national
struggle is the fundamentally main contradiction. The ruling class in the
South while aware of this have no desire to see the issue of the national
question raise its head because what it needs most of all is stability.
Stability means profits for the capitalist class. That is why Bertie Ahearn
worked so hard with Blair to forge a settlement that would effectively
emasculate the main body fighting for the completion of the national
question, the provisional IRA. At the same time he made sure that the so
called ‘republican” credentials of Fianna Fail were to the fore so that they
could not be outflanked by Sinn Fein (provisional). Both Ahearn and his
designated successor as leader of Fianna Fail, Brian Cowen, are perceived to
be “strong” on the republican issue.
But saying that does not change anything. We now have a settlement of sorts
in the North that has taken the pressure from the British. The power
–sharing regime of Sinn Fein and the DUP is inherently unstable. Of course
it will not collapse tomorrow for they both need each other if they are to
retain power. The vast majority of people on the island probably think that
the “settlement “ in the North will work and that things can only get
better. There is little chance of that.
British interest rates have just gone up to 5.75% adding more to the
mortgages many have to pay out monthly. This at a time when first time
buyers have been priced out of the housing market by property speculators
buying all round them with a view to buy to let. Traditional housing has
been replace by apartment blocks discouraging family or community life.
The Northern Ireland executive will have to make a decision in Autumn on
water charges and many householders have now difficulty making ends meet to
pay the rates which are due to continuously rise over the next six years.
In the south of Ireland house prices fell for the third month in a row in
May. The average house price is now €304,166, 2.1% below where it was at the
start of this year. There have been eight rate rises already since the end
of 2005. The ECB base rate now stands at 4%, with most analysts predicting
4.5% at least by the end of the year.
A recent report by University College Dublin economist Morgan Kelly looked
at house prices across the OECD since 1970 and found that the higher house
prices rise, the harder the fall. He believes that real house prices give up
70% of what they gained in a boom during the bust that follows. That would
devastate many families
Figures from the Irish Exchequer showed that revenues from property-related
taxes such as capital gains tax and stamp duty, were €215m below target.
More than 1,000 foreign companies since the mid 1990’s have come to Ireland
and unemployment had fallen from 15% to 4.4%.. But Unions are demanding
even higher wages, as inflation rises above 5%. In the face of higher wages
and lower wage economies in Eastern Europe, those foreign companies could
soon leave.
According to data released by the Central Statistics Office (CSO), the
number of people signing on the Live Register (The Live Register does not
measure unemployment as it includes people on benefits who work part-time,
seasonally or are casually employed.) in June rose to its highest level in
almost three years,
The CSO report also found that the standard rate of unemployment is now at
its highest point since September 2003. Employers’ representative body IBEC,
said that the data showed the Irish labour market is beginning to weaken for
the first time in a number of years. The construction sector is likely to
feel the brunt of any slowdown.
IBEC economist Fergal O'Brien said: " the scale of the June increase
confirms that the Irish labour market is experiencing some deterioration."
For Ireland to continue to prosper under capitalism, it has to become less
reliant on consumer spending, and house price growth. But if people have
their backs to the wall, with their house prices falling and their home loan
payments rising, it’s going to be difficult to convince them not to keep
demanding higher wages.
Now there are some republicans who see the raising of class issues such as
these as a distraction, somehow taking away from the purity of the national
struggle. And on the other hand there are some who allegedly on the left,
who see the mere mention of the class struggle as some kind of retreat into
economism or the type of labourist politics epitomised by William Walker
that James Connolly argued so strongly against.
Lest there be any misunderstanding the issue of the national question in
Ireland is at heart a class question. The division of the country into two
separate states has encouraged sectarianism, seriously dividing the working
class and allowing the continued exploitation of all workers. When working
class people get more upset about the flying of flags, and the marching of
bands and banners past their estates than they do about the scandalous abuse
of cheap labour, the daily exploitation of both migrant and young workers
and the spread of landlordism and the selling off of state owned resources
then the reasons for partition are evident.
Since the foundation of the Northern state the republican strategy to end
partition has abysmally failed. Despite the existence of the most effective
guerrilla army in Western Europe the provisional movement failed in their
objective and had to make peace with the enemy whilst selling that peace as
a victory. The armed campaign of the INLA hampered by internal divisions,
spiked by British agents and without a coherent clear political direction
drifted into failure despite the heroic efforts of its genuinely
revolutionary members.
Many republicans are now beginning to come to terms with the scale of the
defeat suffered by anti-imperialists. Over the past years there has been an
increase in the number of organisations that call themselves republican.
Some dialogue and debate has taken place within and between these
organisations. The IRSP has always been willing to talk to anyone. But
talking is not the same thing as working with others in some new kind of
talking shop. Too often in the past, so-called revolutionary organisations
have spent more time examining their entrails than actually doing things to
persuade the people that their politics are right.
The way ahead lies in analysing the mistakes of the past, actively engaging
in all manifestations of discontent in society and above all fighting to
achieve leadership in the developing class conflicts that undoubtedly lie
ahead. Part of that will involve republican socialism reaching out to
progressive elements in both the catholic and protestant working classes. If
dialogue with other republicans is along these lines then well and good. If
on the other hand it is merely an attempt to recreate the old republican
model that serves the Irish working class so badly in the past then it is
doomed to failure and the IRSP should be very clear that that is a road we
have no intention of going down. Our task is to link the fight against the
sectarian Northern statelet and the subservient Free state to the struggle
for a fundamental transformation in pay, jobs, housing, social services, and
control in the workplace, opening the way to working class control and
power. Let us build a revolutionary party that fights for a workers'
republic in the many struggles against capitalism and British imperialism
that will emerge in the future.
(Gerry Ruddy)
Response to Sunday Times article.
In response to an article in the Sunday Times 8th July by John Mooney we
wish to state the following:
At no time did either of us portray to speak on behalf of INLA We are not
members of INLA. At no time did we infer that INLA were involved in a
dispute with criminals in Dublin
The reporter John Mooney called to Declan Duffy's home and asked him
if it were true that he had been informed by Gardai that his life was
under serious threat, Declan replied that it was. Declan gave a no comment
to a series of questions that Mooney put to him and closed the door.
Eddie Mc Garrigle was telephoned by John Mooney on two occasions.
Eddie confirmed to Mooney that there was always a level of tension between
republicans and drug gangs in the Dublin area and that this was nothing new,
however this has not resulted in violence. Eddie stated his belief that in
no way would he believe that INLA would resort to throwing hand grenades in
Dublin, He reminded him that it is public knowledge that drug gangs are
currently involved in disputes with each other and that this has seen many
gangland murders and grenade and pipe bomb attacks. Eddie pointed out that
whilst the Gardai were briefing journalists telling them INLA were involved
that in reality they knew this was a falsehood and that the person arrested
by them has no link whatsoever with the RSM. Eddie also stated that he had
been in many delegations to the Irish Government over the years and that
no-one from the Government had raised any concerns about the INLA
cease-fire, on the contrary Bertie Ahern has publicly praised the leadership
shown by the RSM.
Signed
Eddie Mc Garrigle
Declan Duffy
IRSP Ard Comhairle statement 20/6/07
The IRSP Ard Comhairle condemn the activities of Gardai special branch in
the Waterford area following the arrest and charging under section thirty of
two local IRSP members James Butler and John O’Donoghue.
The IRSP views these arrests as a crude attempt to disrupt and hinder the
continuing development of the IRSP in the twenty-six counties.
Ard Comhairle member Pól Little stated that the latest events highlighted
the draconian nature of the southern criminal justice system.
“This is clearly an attack on the IRSP as well as radical political
agitation within the 26 Counties.
Today we have two individuals who face substantial prison terms on the word
of a single Gardai officer, all because of their political orientation.”
“It is clear that Section 30 must be scrapped and we will be flagging this
plight of the two individuals with all appropriate Human Rights bodies.”
Statement Ends
Irish Republican Socialist Party
PSNI helicopter activity
Following recent low flying helicopter activity in the Andersonstown area of
west Belfast the Irish Republican Socialist Party has issued a statement
challenging the PSNI over their use of this crude method of surveillance.
Gerard Foster said "Low flying helicopters are renowned for the structural
damage they cause to property and in rural areas they have been known to
cause of the death of livestock. They have been used by British army
soldiers to intimidate the community in the past. We would then pose the
question as to why a PSNI helicopter would constantly circle a residential
area at low altitude for any length of time."
Mr. Foster continued "It's the view of the IRSP that British army
helicopters have been replaced with PSNI helicopters to further implement
the British policy of normalising their rule in Ireland."
Mr. Foster concluded by saying "Certainly if the arguments that we have
entered a new policing dispensation are to have any credit, the PSNI mustn't
pick up were the British army left off."
Friday 6 July, 2007. Statement ends.
The case of Róisín McAliskey
Róisín McAliskey is a 35 year old mother of two children aged ten and two.
She is the daughter of Civil Rights activist and former MP Bernadette
McAliskey. Róisín has been involved in community development work for nearly
20 years. She currently works with vulnerable young adults and survivors of
trauma and conflict.
Róisín was arrested in 1996 in relation to a mortar bomb attack carried out
by the Irish Republican Army on a British Army base in Osnabruck, Germany.
There is substantial evidence that Róisín was at home in Ireland at the time
of the attack. Within a few months of the attack a principal prosecution
witness was unable to identify her from a recent photograph. There was also
controversy over evidence gathered by German authorities.
Despite this Róisín was flown to London and detained for over a year but was
never charged with any offence. Although pregnant at the time of her arrest
in 1996 Róisín was categorised as a Category A prisoner and held in Holloway
Women’s Prison, before being transferred to the high security all male
prison at Belmarsh.
The detention of Róisín McAliskey was recognised by Amnesty International as
“cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment”
For Amnesty's Report on the detention of Róisín please click on link below:-
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEU...open&of=ENG-2U3 (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR450081997?open&of=ENG-2U3)
<http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGEUR450081997?open&of=ENG-2U3>
In 1998 the then British Home Secretary Jack Straw refused the extradition
of Róisín on the grounds that it would be “unjust and oppressive” and Róisín
returned home to Ireland.
Subsequently in July 2000 the Solicitor General reported to the British
House of Commons as follows:
Mr Goggins: To ask the Solicitor-General if he will make a statement
concerning the possible prosecution of Róisín McAliskey.
The Solicitor-General: Further to the statement of the Home Secretary on 10
March 1998, Offical Report, column 133W, that he would not order the
extradition of Róisín McAliskey to Germany, the Crown Prosecution Service,
in accordance with this this country’s obligations under Article 7 of the
European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism, has considered whether
to prosecute Róisín McAliskey in this country for the offences allegedly
committed in Germany in relation to the Osnabruck bombing of 28 June 1996.
The test applied by the Crown Prosecution Service is the test set out in the
Code for Crown Prosecutors that applies to all prosecution will be commenced
or proceeded with only if there is sufficient evidence to afford a realistic
prospect of conviction and that prosecution is in the public interest.
The Crown Prosecution Service, having taken the advice of Senior Treasury
Counsel, has concluded that there is not a realistic prospect of convicting
Miss McAliskey for any offence arising out of the Osnabruck bombing. It has
reached that conclusion having taken into account the available evidence and
the likely result of any argument that may be put forward by Miss McAliskey
that to prosecute her now would be an abuse of process.
The Law Officers have been consulted and we agree with the conclusion
reached by the Crown Prosectution Service.
“It is not usual for the Law Officers to make announcements concerning
consideration of individual cases. In this instance, the Home Secretary, in
a written reply, 20 March 1998, Offical report, column 742W, said that this
matter would be considered for prosecution in the United Kingdom. It is
right that the House should be informed of the outcome of those
considerations.”
On 21 May 2007 officers from PSNI, C.I.D and European Mutual Assistance Unit
sealed off access to the Cul-de-Sac where Róisín lives with her two young
children, and arrested her at 8.12am.
Róisín was handed a copy of a “European Arrest Warrant” issued by Dr Diemer,
the Prosecutor General at the Federal German Court of Justice on 12 October
2006. The warrant was received by SOCA (Serious Organised Crime Agency) on 6
November 2006.
No explanation has been given for the seven month delay.
Immediately a number of questions arise:
1. Why (given the authoritative statement by the Solicitor General that
there is no evidence which could sustain any charge) have the Germans abused
the Extradition Act (2003) to fast track Roisin’s removal to Germany?
2. Given the “fast track” purpose of the European Extradition Warrant,
why did it “disappear” in the UK from Nov 2006 to May 2007?
3. Given its “assisted disappearance”, for what reason and by whose
authority was it acted upon in May 2007?
http://www.marxist.com/interview-alan-wood...ution180607.htm (http://www.marxist.com/interview-alan-woods-venezuelan-revolution180607.htm)
<http://www.marxist.com/interview-alan-woods-venezuelan-revolution180607.htm
>
An interview with Alan Woods on the Venezuelan revolution today
By Humania del Sur
Monday, 18 June 2007
Q.John Riddell, in his review of your book “The Venezuelan Revolution, a
Marxist perspective”, wonders if a small Marxist current like the one you
lead can influence the course of events in the world and says that at least
you have the merit of going part of the way together with the Bolivarian
Revolution in Venezuela. How was this possible? How did you manage it? Did
they contact you? Tell us how your first meeting with Chavez was and how the
relation between the International Marxist tendency, the government of Hugo
Chávez and the sectors that support it are developing. Do you really believe
you can influence events in Venezuela in some way?
A.History shows that a small group with clear ideas can play a decisive role
in certain historical situations, while a big mass party with incorrect
ideas can be transformed in a given moment into a great zero. It is
sufficient to recall on the one hand the Bolshevik Party which, at the
beginning of 1917 was a small minority in Russia, and on the other hand the
collapse of the Social Democratic and Communist parties in Germany in 1933.
It is true that the Corriente Marxista Revolucionaria is as yet very small
in Venezuela, but we are very strong in ideas, and that in the last instance
is the only guarantee of success. I might add that it was precisely the
strength of our ideas that led to my first encounter with President Chávez,
who had read my book Reason in Revolt, which he liked and which he has been
so kind as to recommend on several occasions.
As to the influence we might have in Venezuela, that depends in part on the
work of the Venezuelan Marxists, in part on the experience of the masses. In
general the masses do not learn from books but from experience. But in a
revolution the masses learn more in one week than in a decade of normal
life. Lenin used to say that for the masses an ounce of experience is worth
a ton of theory - and he was a great theoretician.
The masses have already learnt many things in this decade of revolution.
They know how to distinguish their real friends from their enemies (even
when these wear a red shirt). We could put it this way: although the masses
may not know exactly what they want, they know full well what they do not
want. The development of consciousness continues: the influence of the
reformists is declining and that of the most revolutionary wing, together
with that of the Marxist tendency that I have the honour of representing is
growing.
Q.You have openly expressed your admiration for President Chávez. However,
you have said that you consider that the Bolivarian Revolution is
“incomplete”. What do you mean by this?
A.The Bolivarian Revolution is a revolution in the sense that Trotsky
explained in The History of the Russian Revolution, that is, a situation in
which the masses participate actively in politics and try to take their
destiny into their own hands and change society from the bottom. But it is
unfinished because it has not yet succeeded in expropriating totally the
oligarchy and the old state apparatus remains more or less intact. As long
as things continue like this, it cannot be said that the revolution is
irreversible. President Chávez once compared it to the myth of Sisyphus, who
was condemned to roll a heavy boulder to the top of a hill, at which point
it always rolled back to the starting-point. The problem is that if this
particular rock rolls backwards, it will crush a lot of people.
Trotsky once said: “truth and not lies is the motor-force of history”.
What, in your opinion, is the truth of the Bolivarian Revolution? And what
are the lies? Are we in the presence of a real transformation of Venezuelan
reality, heading for socialism of the xxi century or is it all a deception
that will end in the consolidation of a new political and economic elite
that has nothing in common with revolution or socialism?
The great truth is that in a revolution - that means also the Bolivarian -
in the end one class has to win and the other lose, and that throughout
history no ruling class has ever surrendered without a pitiless struggle.
The great lie consists in empty and vainglorious declarations to the effect
that the Bolivarian Revolution “is irreversible” and other such stupid and
irresponsible nonsense which merely attempts to deceive the people and lull
it to sleep instead of arousing it to struggle against the danger of
counter-revolution.
As for the so-called theory of socialism of the XXI century, I think it is
an attempt to distort the ideas of President Chávez and to divert the
process towards reformism. People like Heinz Dieterich are striving by all
means to water down the revolutionary message of the President and fill it
with a completely reformist one. They are opposed to nationalisations, they
preach reconciliation between the classes, that is, they are trying to teach
the tiger to eat lettuce. And they call this nonsense “realism”! I am
writing a book against the ideas of Dieterich and the reformists, and I hope
to make clear the difference between Marxism - the authentically
revolutionary theory - and this caricature.
Q.What other criticisms would you make of the Bolivarian Revolution, apart
from the fact that you consider it to be incomplete?
A.Some time ago Hugo Chávez asked me the same question. I replied in the
following way. Your revolution is a real source of inspiration for millions.
That is the most important thing. But it does have some weak points, for
example, the absence of a clearly defined programme and policy, and the lack
of politically educated cadres; in other words, the lack of a revolutionary
party, the lack of a revolutionary leadership.
It is true that later there have been attempts to remedy some of these
failings. For example, the President has proclaimed the socialist character
of the Revolution - something that our Tendency has been advocating from the
very beginning. But this idea is meeting with stubborn resistance from the
reformists and Stalinists. The battle is not yet won.
Q. What do you think of the criticisms of the Venezuelan opposition that the
President has displayed authoritarian attitudes and that his condition as a
military man does not favour the democratic rules of play? For example, what
is your opinion about his declared intention of remaining in power for an
unlimited term and his comments about a “peaceful but not unarmed”
revolution? Are socialism and democracy incompatible?
Why should they be? Socialism is democratic or it is nothing! Of course,
when I speak of democracy I do not refer to the vulgar caricature of
bourgeois democracy - which is only another name for the dictatorship of big
Capital. What democracy exists in the USA, where there are supposed to be
two parties that, as Gore Vidal explains very well, are really only one
party representing different wings of the bourgeoisie. In order to be
President of the USA one has to be a millionaire. What kind of a democracy
is that?
The protests of the Venezuelan opposition are pure hypocrisy. They have lost
the elections and referendums, one after another. They lost again last
December when Chávez obtained the biggest majority in the history of
Venezuela. And they cannot say that this was a fraud! These elections were
the most highly scrutinized in the history of the world! They were all out
there in Caracas, searching with a magnifying glass for even the smallest
evidence of fraud. If they had found any they would have shouted it from the
rooftops. But they did not find anything.
These elections provide a very clear mandate to the Bolivarian government -
a mandate for fundamental change in society. That is what the masses are
really demanding! Hugo Chávez must carry out the wishes of those who voted
for him, the workers and peasants, the poor people and the youth, ignoring
completely the howling of the counterrevolutionary opposition, which is
nothing but the mouthpiece of the corrupt and reactionary oligarchy and its
master in Washington. We must take drastic and urgent measures. It is high
time to carry out the expropriation of the oligarchy!
Q. Concerning the question of the media and information in Venezuela, ever
since Hugo Rafael Chávez Frías assumed the Presidency of the Republic in
December 1998, the government has been reducing the freedom of the press,
which is defined as “the guarantee by the government of freedom of
expression for citizens and associations, including those dedicated to the
collection and broadcasting of information” while strengthening the media
owned by the state, which are dedicated to the transmission of programmes of
an “ideological” character. Isn’t this contrary to human rights? Is
socialism against rights?
A. Come on, now! How can we speak of freedom of the media, of the means of
communication, when all these are owned by a handful of rich men like Rupert
Murdoch? The so-called freedom of expression in Britain and the USA is a
joke in very bad taste!
Of course, socialism must respect human rights. But let us start by
defending the rights of the overwhelming majority of the population who,
until now, never had any real rights or a voice to express their opinions.
What we should do is to nationalise the press, the radio and television, but
not leave these things in the hands of the state (we do not want a
totalitarian state as in the USSR) but to guarantee access to the media to
any party, social or trade union organization according to the number of
members, votes in elections, etc. they have. Thus, the PSUV would have
several daily papers and more than one TV station, and the owners of RCTV
could have a small monthly journal like El Militante which they would be
free to sell at the bus stops... That is to say, we would give the bourgeois
the same rights they give to us, neither more nor less.
Q. What do you think of the case of Radio Caracas Televisión, a company with
more than 50 years of history, which had its licence cancelled by the
government in May?
A. As far as RCTV is concerned, everybody knows that this was a
counterrevolutionary (“golpista”) station. If I were to criticize the
President, I would say he should have acted a lot sooner against this nest
of vipers. And he should not only have closed them down but he should have
arrested the bosses and put them on trial.
Yet again, the orchestrated campaign over this issue is just plain
hypocrisy. I can assure you that if a British TV company had attacked Blair
in the same way that this lot did to Chávez, advocating a coup and even the
assassination of the head of state, they would be in prison before their
feet could touch the ground. No! The problem here is not that we “have gone
too far”, as Heinz Dieterich and others think, but that we have been too
soft. For example, how many of the April 2002 conspirators are behind bars?
As far as I know, not one. This would not be the case in the USA, I can
assure you!
Q. Many chavistas are sceptical about the President’s appeal to form the
PSUV, because they fear that it may be an attempt to control and silence
internal dissent. What do you think about this? Is a single party an
instrument suitable for promoting a “revolution within the revolution” which
is what you support?
A. On the one hand, it is evident that the working class needs a political
party and also that the old parties that made up the MVR were very bad,
totally taken over by the bureaucracy and the reformists. Therefore, it
seems to me that the proclamation of the PSUV could be an important step
forward, but only on condition that it is a genuinely revolutionary party,
that is, a democratic and class party, controlled by the working class rank
and file and not just another bureaucratic apparatus for the careerists and
opportunists. Here also the presence of a strong Marxist tendency is
absolutely necessary.
Q. Your book on Venezuela has been translated into various languages,
including Urdu. This has made Chávez and the Bolivarian Revolution known in
countries like India and Pakistan. Do you really think that what is
happening in Venezuela is an example for the world? If so, why?
A. It is true that my book has been a great success because it fills a
vacuum. Unfortunately, a great part of the Left internationally has not
understood the significance of the Bolivarian Revolution, although this
situation is changing rapidly, as people begin to find out what is going on
in Venezuela. In all this a very important role has been played, and is
still being played, by our international campaign Hands off Venezuela.
Why is the Venezuelan revolution important for the rest of the world? Well,
in the first place, all this should not be happening! After the fall of the
USSR the bourgeoisie succumbed to a mood of euphoria. They spoke of the end
of socialism, the end of communism, of revolution, even the end of history.
Now Venezuela has turned all these delusions on their head! The Bolivarian
Revolution is like an echo of those famous last words of Galileo: “Eppur si
muove!” (And yet, it moves!).
In the last period capitalism has demonstrated that it is incapable of
satisfying the most basic necessities of the masses. On all sides we see
more hunger, more diseases, more misery, more wars. But there is also an
increasing reaction by the people. Classical physics says: every action
produces an equal and opposite reaction. That is also true in politics! The
mass movement increasingly tends to question the capitalist system - even in
the USA. And Venezuela offers a point of reference for these movements. That
is why the imperialists are hell-bent on destroying the Bolivarian
Revolution at all costs, because it gives an example to millions of
exploited and oppressed people in America and further afield.
In Venezuela there is a class struggle that has an increasingly sharp and
ferocious character. We still do not know how it will end. But we do know on
what side of the barricades we are! With the workers and peasants and
against the bourgeois, bankers and landowners! With the revolutionary youth
and the vanguard that wants to carry the revolution forward, striking hard
blows against the counter-revolutionaries, and against the timid reformists
and cowardly and treacherous bureaucrats!
If anyone had any doubt about whether we should support the Bolivarian
Revolution, it is only necessary to see the attitude of US imperialism,
which does not conceal its plans to overthrow Chávez and is backing the
counter-revolution. This detail is sufficient to convince anyone of the
necessity to rally to the defence of the Bolivarian Revolution. But in order
to defend it seriously, it is absolutely necessary to go further,
liquidating the economic power of the oligarchy. It is not sufficient to
talk about socialism; it is necessary to make it a reality! And this can
only be done when the working class takes power into its hands.
Once the working class takes power into its hands, the Bolivarian Revolution
will lose its ambiguous and indecisive character and will acquire an
irresistible strength, passing beyond the narrow national frontiers and
transforming itself rapidly into a continental revolutionary movement. The
conditions are more than ripe for this! Today there is not a single stable
bourgeois regime in all Latin America - from Tierra del Fuego to the Rio
Grande. The great vision of the Libertador, Simon Bolivar, of the
revolutionary unification of Latin America, would be feasible for the first
time. But it would only be possible in a Socialist Federation of Latin
America, which in turn would be the first step towards world socialism.
London, 6 June, 2007
[Note: to be published shortly in Revista Humania del Sur, Revista de
Estudios Latinoamericanos Africanos y Asiáticos de la Facultad de
Humanidades y Educación de la Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida -
Venezuela, http://www.saber.ula.ve/humaniadelsur/
<http://www.saber.ula.ve/humaniadelsur/> ]
FROM THE MEDIA
The fire this time
The government has been ineffectual in closing the country's vast poverty
gap
Sara Mampane has been waiting for the African National Congress to fulfil
its promise of a new home - what she calls a "proper house", where the only
corrugated iron is on the roof and the walls are made of brick - since the
party came to power with the collapse of apartheid 13 years ago.
The 43-year-old mother of three watched from her rickety two-room shack with
no electricity in a squatter camp on the edge of Mamelodi township as others
moved to one of the new box houses built by the government. She was content
to wait her turn and be grateful for what did arrive, principally access to
clean water and a health clinic for her children. But her patience snapped
last month when men in red boiler suits came to demolish her home.
The feared "red ants" descended on the camp to remove the thousands of
illegally built corrugated iron shacks that have spread out from the edge of
the township in recent years. The residents were so incensed that they
stoned one of the men to death and injured others, and set fire to four
trucks.
"They promised me a house but they say wait, wait, wait," said Ms Mampane.
"So I am waiting. But it is not right to come and knock down the house I
have before they build me a new one. This is what we expected from
apartheid, not from our own government. I think they have forgotten us."
Weeks of on and off rioting in Mamelodi over the demolitions and lack of
services have rekindled memories of the township as a hotbed of protest
against the apartheid regime two decades ago. Last week hundreds of angry
protesters threw up barricades and burned tyres in clashes with police. Last
month the residents set fire to local council offices.
The disturbances are not limited to Mamelodi. Hundreds of similar protests
have spread across South Africa, fuelled by anger at the slow pace of
change.
Thirteen years after the end of apartheid, the poverty gap in South Africa
remains among the largest in the world - second only to Brazil by some
measurements. More than 40% of South Africans live on less than eight rand
(59p) a day. More than one third of the working-age population is
unemployed.
But it is the evident wealth of others, mostly white but including a small
newly enriched black elite, that has contributed to bitter divisions within
the ANC over the government's economic strategy. The issue is expected to
dominate a party conference this week.
Time bomb
Some in the ANC are warning that the wealth gap is a time bomb for the
country and the party, which is losing touch with the mass of its voters and
"betraying the national democratic revolution" with too much focus on
creating a liberal business climate.
Trade unions are leading the attack on economic priorities they say have
principally benefited the emerging black elite, and the old white one, at
the expense of the poor. "It's like a doctor saying an operation has been
successful when the patient is dead," Zwelinzima Vavi, secretary general of
the Congress of South African Trade Unions, a partner in the ruling alliance
with the ANC, told a rally in the Free State this month.
Few deny that the ANC has taken significant strides toward reducing poverty.
According to figures released last week, the government has built more than
2m new homes since 1994, although the numbers of people living in squatter
camps has risen by half over the same period.
About 85% of households have access to fresh water, up from 61% when the ANC
came to power. More than 71% have inside toilets attached to the sewage
system, up from about 50%. More than 4m homes have been connected to mains
electricity over the same period, although the price of power has quadrupled
and many people have been cut off because they cannot pay the bills.
South Africa's minister of provincial and local government, Sydney Mufamadi,
has said the protests reflect the government's successes. "As we make
progress in some municipalities, the residents in other municipalities
become impatient: they expect their public representatives to deliver in the
same way as progress is made in other municipalities," he told a UN news
agency.
Unshared growth
The government's latest strategy, the accelerated and shared growth
initiative, seeks to halve poverty and unemployment by 2014 by continuing
the significant economic growth of recent years and creating millions of new
jobs.
Charles Meth, a respected researcher on poverty at Cape Town university,
says the government is working on "over-optimistic" predictions, and that
though economic growth is crucial it will take decades to eradicate endemic
poverty. "The treasury is driving an agenda that says growth is going to
rescue us," he says. "It's nonsense.
"Within the state there's a huge amount of tension over poverty policy. On
the one hand you've got the minister of social development, Zola Skweyiya,
very sensibly saying this is not going to be enough and we have to have some
kind of basic grant for those people who are going to be left out by these
anti-poverty policies and growth policies that you're looking at. The
cabinet rounds on him and says 'bollocks'."
The government concedes that though poverty has decreased since 2000, the
gap between rich and poor has not narrowed.
The poor can see it only too well. Where the fault line between the haves
and the have nots once ran almost exclusively along racial lines, the ANC's
policy of black economic empowerment has created a new class of super-rich
blacks driving the most expensive cars and living in mansions with servants
and swimming pools. Many of the new elite have links to the ruling party.
The policy's defenders say that it is forcing a shift in economic power to
the black majority that will trickle down to the poor. Some of its critics
say that all too often blacks have merely become the public face of white
interests.
Smuts Ngonyama, a former spokesman for President Thabo Mbeki asked to
explain why he received shares in a private company while working for the
government, said he did not join the struggle against apartheid to remain
poor. Tokyo Sexwale, one of the few ANC leaders to have declared he is
running to succeed Mr Mbeki, has also been forced to defend his
extraordinary accumulation of wealth.
The unions and ANC left have an uphill struggle to change the policy at this
week's party conference. The leadership wants an endorsement of a document
that Johannesburg's Centre for Policy Studies has described as so "bland,
uncritical and vague" that it leaves the impression that the ANC "just
doesn't care for the poor and socially marginalised groups".
But Max Sisulu, one of the party's economic policy strategists, says the ANC
is not disturbed by the criticism.
"We are not worried about differences. We welcome them," he says. "We can
only benefit from differences."
BEE bumbling: The rise of the new elite
The Black Economic Empowerment affirmative action policy to break the white
stranglehold on the economy is either the fast track to addressing past
wrongs or another get-rich-quick scheme in a country where a greed-is-good
culture pervades.
BEE's supporters say the shift in political power after apartheid is
compromised by continued white control of the economy. Companies with a
significant black stake control just 5% of the Johannesburg stock exchange.
Empowerment laws require larger white-owned businesses to sell a 25% stake
to black partners.
But BEE is also seen as just jobs for some of the ANC boys (and girls).
Critics say the policy has encouraged black people to set up companies that
serve no other purpose than to help white-owned firms meet their
obligations. There have been a number of scandals, perhaps most notably that
involving the woman known as the "Queen of BEE", Danisa Baloyi, who had to
resign from more than a dozen company boards after two people were arrested
on fraud allegations at one of the companies
Chris McGreal in Mamelodi Tuesday June 26, 2007 The Guardian
<http://www.guardian.co.uk/ <http://www.guardian.co.uk/> >
Back copies of the Plough can be accessed at
http://www.irsm.org/irsp/plough/ <http://www.irsm.org/irsp/plough/>
Please feel free to comment on the contents of the Plough. We welcome
political comments and criticisms. If you would prefer to receive the Plough
as an attachment please e-mail with heading “add attachment”. If you know of
anybody who might wish to receive the Plough please send his or her e-mail
address to [email protected] or [email protected]
If you wish to receive back copies of the “The Plough” Please e-mail”
to [email protected] < or [email protected] stateing which
numbers you wish.
To unsubscribe to the Plough please send e-mail entitled “unsubscribe” to
[email protected] or [email protected] It is the policy of
the Plough to acknowledge information and articles from other sources.
The Republican Socialist Youth Movement have re-launched their website. It
can be viewed at www.rsym.org. Republican Socialist Youth Movement.
www.rsym.org <http://www.rsym.org>
The Republican Socialist Youth Movement has produced a short video on the
situation concerning Shannon airport and its continued use by American
troops and the CIA. The video can be viewed at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH0WqJb95l8 .
Daly / Mc Namee Cumann Irish Republican Socialist Party Costello
House 392b Falls Road Belfast BT12 6DH 028 9032
1024 [email protected] http://www.irsm.org
For general enquiries: e [email protected] Join the IRSP here!
<http://www.angelfire.com/space/derryirsp/join.htm>
Subscribe to the bi-monthly “The Starry Plough/An Camchéachta”
P.O. Box 1981, Derry, BT48 8GX, Ireland.
THE VOICE OF REPUBLICAN SOCIALISM!
E-mail [email protected]
The Starry Plough
http://irsm.org/irsp/starryplough <http://irsm.org/irsp/starryplough>
IRSP: Pairtí Poblachtach Sóisialach na h-Éireann
http://irsm.org/ <http://irsm.org/>
James Connolly Society
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/
<http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/>
James Connolly Archive
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly
<http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly>
The Republican Socialist Forum from Derry IRSP is
http://rsmforum.proboards23.com/index.cgi
<http://rsmforum.proboards23.com/index.cgi>
Republican Socialist Online Merchandise - Website
A website that offers a central place to go on the Internet to find good
quality items with a distinct Republican Socialist theme. Proceeds from
sales from this effort go towards the IRSM and it’s various projects.
http://www.angelfire.com/folk/irishshop/index.html
<http://www.angelfire.com/folk/irishshop/index.html>
Donate to the IRSP:
Standing Order Form
<http://www.theplough.netfirms.com/Forms/Standing%20Order%20Form.pdf>