Log in

View Full Version : Republican Socialism and Democracy



redflag32
31st January 2008, 19:18
Republican Socialism and democracy

Written by Seamus Curran

Thursday, 31 January 2008

http://www.rsym.org/images/stories/DailEireann.jpg

Seamus Curran examines the surpression of the democratic national movement in Ireland following the 1918 general election which led to the establishment of a revolutionary government in Ireland independent of Westminster and how this relates to Ireland today in the context of the Good Friday Agreement.


Overview

Republican Socialism is the belief that the struggle for an end to partition (national liberation) and the struggle for an end to capitalism (socialism) in Ireland are both intertwined so much that they have to be seen as one and the same struggle. Granted, each deserves its own particular tactics and with time these tactics also change, but any attempt to distinguish or separate the two will result in failure. A modern example of this is how the Civil rights campaign in the 6 counties was torn apart by the opposing ideas within it, those who believed that civil rights (democracy-socialism) should come first and those who wanted to use the civil rights movement as a tool for the ending of partition (national liberation), which in their eyes would then bring civil rights (democracy-Socialism) after the national liberation issue was resolved.

This was basically antagonism between the separatist and the social revolutionaries. It is the stance taken by Republican socialists that destroys this antagonism and finally brings the ideas and thoughts of James Connolly to the fore.

Republican Socialist ideology is an attempt to implement democracy into the final outcome of both of these struggles. It is the undemocratic nature of both of these issues that ensures they will never be solved unless democracy is implemented as the basic reasoning in figuring out their settlement. It is the basic ability of the human species to realise and see when an injustice has been committed that keeps these two struggles alive and they will not go away until they are resolved in a way that appeases this basic human appreciation for fairness and equality (democracy).

We can see this basic appreciation even as we watch our kids play together, from an early age they recognise what is fair and what is not. Even if they haven't got the ability to act on it, they can see when a person or a group of people are acting in an unfair way, this is a basic appreciation of the human species and it is what has driven the struggle in Ireland for over 800 years and will continue to do so until a fair and just (democratic) solution is agreed upon.

Partition

The struggle against partition in Ireland is a struggle for democracy. We can show how the partition of Ireland is fundamentally undemocratic; we therefore say that democracy is the only solution to the question of partition in this country.

1918 - democracy was born

The election of 1918 was to mark for the first time in Ireland a democratic mandate by the people for the republican ideal. The elites should have seen this coming in the run up to the election. For instance when, in the middle of 1918 the British tried to enforce conscription in Ireland and the people got behind and backed the united Republican, Nationalist and Labour movement to oppose such a move.

Labour called a one day general strike which was adhered to all over Ireland. Also in a number of by-elections since Easter week the people showed they were behind the Republicans and that the coming 1918 election would be a vote to show this. These by-elections were labeled "war time" elections by the British who said they "proved nothing".

The 1918 election result was a convincing win for the Republicans who took all the seats apart from 7, 4 of these non-republican seats were in Ulster (Loyalist) and one was in England, the only seat's not taken by republicans in the south was one in Waterford which went to John Redmond's son to succeed his father and two new seats which the Tories took, all of the rest were Republican unbroken.

This shows the clear will of the people for the republicans. However this democratic peaceful decision by the Irish people to implement the ideals of 1916 and continue the republic that was set up was ignored by the British elite.

And here lies the cause of Ireland's great problem. Her democratic will has constantly been suppressed by the Capitalist class of Britain and Ireland. Everything stems from the undemocratic decisions taken by the British Capitalists in its conquest of Ireland and its from this point that we must go back to in order to solve our political problem once and for all, no amount of cease fire agreements (GFA) can disguise the basic undemocratic nature of partition in Ireland and until this is solved, until the problem is treated at source, there can be no peace here.

This is where Marxism's tactic of treating social problems at source comes into play and a reason why Marxism has and is a core element of Irish republicanism. Marxist's for instance believe that to solve the drug addiction problem of the world you have to treat it at source and not to try make the problem less intolerable for citizens and addicts by implementing various reforms.

The reforms are welcomed but Marxist's understand that to change people's attitude towards drugs you have to change the rat race they currently live in. It's our society's morals and ideals that are the core problem, not the drug dealers or addicts. Republican Socialists apply the same principles to partition in Ireland, unless you solve the problem at source we are just going around in a sectarian circle, and the only winners are the capitalist class who thrive off of the division of the Irish working class.

There can be no peace until the sectarian state is abolished. This is not a threat; it is a realisation that with the partitioned state comes sectarianism which serves the elite well, this sectarianism separate's the workers from any united front against them and the elite wish to see this continue. This is why we say that unless the causes for sectarianism (partition) are dealt with democratically and at source we can't possibly have proper peace; sectarianism will always rear its ugly head. Seen as the capitalist class of Britain and Ireland favour the division of the workforce it is up to the working class to declare their interests in a united secular workers republic and by pass those in power who use greed, competition and religious sectarianism to keep the majority of the people divided and murdering each other.

The suppression of democracy in Ireland

The Republicans who were elected in 1918 met in Dublin and constituted themselves the governing body of the republic set up in Easter week (Dail Eireann). A declaration was adopted affirming "That Ireland is a sovereign and independent nation; that a republic had been established in Easter week of which the Dail constituted itself the heir and continuation". The Dail adopted a "democratic programme", which showed the influence of Socialist James Connolly. The Dail was declared illegal by the British and every means at their disposal was put to practice in trying to prevent it and destroy it.

This was a blatant disregard and illegal action taken by the British towards the democratic rights of the people of Ireland who voted democratically for the Dail and still to this day it is the cause of all our problems. These problems as Connolly once put it, in describing the affects of partition are called "the carnival of reaction".

The carnival of reaction is a reaction to the undemocratic decisions taken by the British in Ireland and the carnival of reaction will not cease until we settle the problem from its source. The carnival of reaction is Sectarianism, bigotry, national chauvinism, economic injustice, racism, violence etc. The partition of Ireland stemmed from these first undemocratic actions taken by the British.

They made it seem as though we got a bargain at the signing of the treaty but if you remember what the will of the people was in 1918 you will understand that what we got was illegal, especially as the decision to sign the treaty was made under duress, the threat of war from the British in three days if we didn't agree.

The fight for democracy

There then ensued a struggle between the Dail, which represented the democratic will of the Irish people and the British government. The systems of courts set up by the Dail were declared "illegal assemblies". The loan called for by the Dail was treated as seditious, newspapers were suppressed and virtually anyone of any prominence from the republican movement lived on the run during this time and it was from this harassment that military actions sprung from the republican side. It was then an all out war between the democrats (Dail) and the reactionaries (British). Those who took up arms against the oppressor came to be known as "the army of the republic" or popularly the I.R.A. They were fighting on behalf of the democratic right of those elected in 1918. It became clear that the IRA at this time were fighting on behalf of every man woman and child, they were the army of the people.

The thief slips away

This war came to an end in 1921 due to moral and material circumstances. The horrors of the black and tans, the auxiliaries and the pogroms in Belfast had taken its toll on the people and a truce was signed. Let's not forget that the democratic will of the people to elect the people they voted for was still being withheld from them, the British were trying to wear the people and the IRA down and it seemed to be working.

The treaty that was signed and the one which was popularly accepted through referendum was not a democratic affair. When the Irish delegate went into that room for "negotiations" there was always only going to be one outcome, partition and the continued involvement of the British capitalists in our economic interests.

The British Capitalists had control of these negotiations and they wanted to hold onto the 6 counties because it was more industrial than the south. The south was reliant on its farming exports and the British knew they could still control Ireland as a whole if it kept direct control of the most industrial section and also "negotiated" some sort of economic alignment with the rest in return for taking British soldiers off the streets of the 26 counties.

Lets not forget the threat that was hanging over the heads of those who went to "negotiate" with the British; they were told that unless they signed the treaty they would be faced with immediate and terrible war within three days. The British army at that time were in comparison to the American army of today, they had conquered half the world and its army was a force to be reckoned with. The idea of forcing the Irish people to endure the bloody onslaught of this army whilst also knowing the IRA were at the end of their capabilities meant that this "negotiation" was more akin to a thief holding a knife to your throat and demanding your money.

The decision to hand over your money is not a democratic decision because of the perceived threat and the duress you done it under. This is why we say democracy has not been implemented in the settlement of Britain's conquest of Ireland and to this day still hasn't.

Modern Ireland

In modern Ireland Republicans are asked "why we still harp on about something that is in the past", "just move on" they say. But I hope we have shown exactly why republican socialists cannot move on and still see the struggle as something worth devoting their lives to. Republican Socialists come under terrible criticism from the state; they are labelled criminals, drug dealers, and scum and painted as people who are bad for society.

I find this strange as I can see a common ideal with republican socialists and with those who work in the community or charity organisations who are painted as savours and pillars of society. In fact most republicans are involved in these very same activities in their community also. They both are involved in what they do because they care about society and the people in it. They care about the state of the world, poverty, war, the destruction of our environment, the state of women's rights in the work place etc,...They have all of this in common but republican socialists are labeled as bad people, and why?

It's simple really, those who give up their spare time to be involved with community activities or help their old neighbours are not organised enough or politically advanced enough to shift the balance of power into the hands of the workers so that these problems can be better addressed by the people of the society and not just given second place by the rich capitalist ruling class who only have profit and greed as their moral ideals.

Republicans can not " move on" or "get over it" because the problem has not been solved. We still have sectarianism, we still have an economic gap between rich and poor that is actually increasing and not decreasing, we still have homeless people on our streets while there are thousand of vacant homes all over the country, we still have thousands of children living in actual poverty while the Celtic tiger roars ahead and lines the pockets of the capitalist class, and property developers. The problem has not been solved at source, to give the unionist class a veto over the democratic will of the whole of Ireland was undemocratic in 1920 and still is in 2008.

If this undemocratic decision did not create the "carnival of reaction" of which James Connolly predicted, then there may be an argument for " moving on", but the fact is different as we have shown. The struggle for a united workers republic is a struggle for democracy proper; the 26 county state is not what the people voted for in 1918. They voted for the implementation of the "democratic programme" which called for a secular democratic state, instead we got a centre/right wing catholic controlled society that scared away our protestant neighbours even further and was responsible for some of the most awful crimes against man woman and child. A society that threw its unmarried mothers into awful places where they were abused and treated like dirty, a society that allowed the abuse of power and trust that the Catholic institution prevailed over go on for so long.

The working people of Ireland deserve better, we have been on the wrong end of a dirty capitalist stick for centuries. We were once a shining light for democracy in Europe. During the period of "Celtic communism" in Ireland our society was observed as being the most progressive in Europe and people came from far away to see it in practice.

Only when we handed over our society to what was to become the modern capitalist class did our problems begin. Why is it that we are renowned for our inspiration when it comes to writing great books, poems and Music but when it comes to inspirational thought that regards our own society we draw a blank?

Our great inspiration has been channeled away from the working class struggle and into the tourist industry and we must begin a debate to ask how and why. We are a very capable people whose minds have always thought outside of the box, it is sad to watch the creative, inspirational, rebellious and determined working class of Ireland be duped by their political masters for so long.

Republican Socialists owe their allegiance to the working class and always will, they will never "get over it" or "move on" until a society and political system is in place that is best at tackling society's ills, instead of the current one which puts greed up on a pedestal and compassion lying face down in the dirt. Nothing has changed since 1920, democracy is still vacant from Irish life, the democratic struggle continues.

www.RSYM.org (http://www.rsym.org/)

Saorsa
1st February 2008, 03:05
Hear hear!

Qwerty Dvorak
2nd February 2008, 23:18
Republican Socialism is the belief that the struggle for an end to partition (national liberation) and the struggle for an end to capitalism (socialism) in Ireland are both intertwined so much that they have to be seen as one and the same struggle. Granted, each deserves its own particular tactics and with time these tactics also change, but any attempt to distinguish or separate the two will result in failure. A modern example of this is how the Civil rights campaign in the 6 counties was torn apart by the opposing ideas within it, those who believed that civil rights (democracy-socialism) should come first and those who wanted to use the civil rights movement as a tool for the ending of partition (national liberation), which in their eyes would then bring civil rights (democracy-Socialism) after the national liberation issue was resolved.
What you mean is that the civil rights movement in Northern Ireland was infiltrated by Republican terrorists who wanted to hijack the struggle for their own nationalist ends. This inevitably destroyed the civil rights movement and turned what could have been a time of enlightenment, acceptance and tolerance between Catholic and Protestant workers into one of the most shameful and bloodstained periods in the island's recent history.



Republican Socialist ideology is an attempt to implement democracy into the final outcome of both of these struggles. It is the undemocratic nature of both of these issues that ensures they will never be solved unless democracy is implemented as the basic reasoning in figuring out their settlement. It is the basic ability of the human species to realise and see when an injustice has been committed that keeps these two struggles alive and they will not go away until they are resolved in a way that appeases this basic human appreciation for fairness and equality (democracy).

We can see this basic appreciation even as we watch our kids play together, from an early age they recognise what is fair and what is not. Even if they haven't got the ability to act on it, they can see when a person or a group of people are acting in an unfair way, this is a basic appreciation of the human species and it is what has driven the struggle in Ireland for over 800 years and will continue to do so until a fair and just (democratic) solution is agreed upon.
Is this your way of admitting that your ideology is more suited to a bunch of idealistic 12 year olds? I was once a Republican as well. I believed that I had a right to decide who own some plot of land many miles north of where I lived, and that anyone who disagreed with my opinion was a traitor.



The struggle against partition in Ireland is a struggle for democracy. We can show how the partition of Ireland is fundamentally undemocratic; we therefore say that democracy is the only solution to the question of partition in this country.
Partition is undemocratic? Then why can the Republicans not get a majority in Stormont?



The 1918 election result was a convincing win for the Republicans who took all the seats apart from 7, 4 of these non-republican seats were in Ulster (Loyalist) and one was in England, the only seat's not taken by republicans in the south was one in Waterford which went to John Redmond's son to succeed his father and two new seats which the Tories took, all of the rest were Republican unbroken.

Well if it was right in 1918 it has to be right today!



And here lies the cause of Ireland's great problem. Her democratic will has constantly been suppressed by the Capitalist class of Britain and Ireland. Everything stems from the undemocratic decisions taken by the British Capitalists in its conquest of Ireland and its from this point that we must go back to in order to solve our political problem once and for all, no amount of cease fire agreements (GFA) can disguise the basic undemocratic nature of partition in Ireland and until this is solved, until the problem is treated at source, there can be no peace here.

HAHAHA, because the Irish capitalists have *nothing* to do with it. Sure how could they be in the wrong, they're members of our blessed divine race!

Seriously, this tactic of blaming everything on the British is getting old. It's about time we stopped chasing idealistic nationalist dreams and faced up to our own reality; the main enemies of the Irish working class are the Irish capitalists.



There can be no peace until the sectarian state is abolished. This is not a threat; it is a realisation that with the partitioned state comes sectarianism which serves the elite well, this sectarianism separate's the workers from any united front against them and the elite wish to see this continue. This is why we say that unless the causes for sectarianism (partition) are dealt with democratically and at source we can't possibly have proper peace; sectarianism will always rear its ugly head. Seen as the capitalist class of Britain and Ireland favour the division of the workforce it is up to the working class to declare their interests in a united secular workers republic and by pass those in power who use greed, competition and religious sectarianism to keep the majority of the people divided and murdering each other.
If you disagree with religious hatred and sectarianism then why fan the flames of nationalism, when nationalism is such a primary cause of these tow things? Workers are ultimately divided more by nationalism than nationality itself. We need to abandon the national question and start finding answers to the class question.



Republicans can not " move on" or "get over it" because the problem has not been solved. We still have sectarianism, we still have an economic gap between rich and poor that is actually increasing and not decreasing, we still have homeless people on our streets while there are thousand of vacant homes all over the country, we still have thousands of children living in actual poverty while the Celtic tiger roars ahead and lines the pockets of the capitalist class, and property developers. The problem has not been solved at source, to give the unionist class a veto over the democratic will of the whole of Ireland was undemocratic in 1920 and still is in 2008.
First of all, Republicanism is the cause of sectarianism, not the cure. And it is disingenuous for you to preach Republicanism as an end to poverty and the wealth gap, especially when the word "socialism" doesn't appear once in the quoted paragraph. And finally, blaming Unionists for poverty and homelessness is completely insane. You're acting as if all Republicans/Irish people are staunch socialists or something. Most Republicans are no better than most Unionists when it comes to addressing the imbalance between classes.

redflag32
3rd February 2008, 20:41
What you mean is that the civil rights movement in Northern Ireland was infiltrated by Republican terrorists who wanted to hijack the struggle for their own nationalist ends. This inevitably destroyed the civil rights movement and turned what could have been a time of enlightenment, acceptance and tolerance between Catholic and Protestant workers into one of the most shameful and bloodstained periods in the island's recent history.

"republican terrorists":laugh: I think we can guess that your opinion on this essay is tainted by hatred for anything republican. You also show-in this first paragraph-an absolute ignorance of what happened in the civil rights movement. To blame republicans for the violent turn of the movement is off the wall. Its an accepted fact that it was stormonts sectarian response to the peaceful demands that caused the movement to take a more aggressive approach. They used their puppets (Loyalists and RUC) to attack the movement in the hope of suppressing it, this is what caused the reaction from the movement, not "republican terrorists",as you claim.



Is this your way of admitting that your ideology is more suited to a bunch of idealistic 12 year olds? I was once a Republican as well. I believed that I had a right to decide who own some plot of land many miles north of where I lived, and that anyone who disagreed with my opinion was a traitor.

Its the position of republican socialists that the people own the land, North,South,East and West. And anyone who disagrees would be seen as a traitor to their class. Is this not your position as a socialist?



Partition is undemocratic? Then why can the Republicans not get a majority in Stormont?

For the same reasons that the SP lost its seats in the free state or that socialists in the south cant get a majority. I would have thought it obvious to a socialist that the workers class consciousness is not at a level where they would be voting for social change.


Well if it was right in 1918 it has to be right today!

He was making the point that the vote of 1918 was a democratic one and it was wrongfully suppressed, do you not agree?



HAHAHA, because the Irish capitalists have *nothing* to do with it. Sure how could they be in the wrong, they're members of our blessed divine race!

Im glad your in a funny mood because whats really funny is that in the section you quoted it clearly debunks your assumption that the writer is saying "Irish capitalists have nothing to do with it".

Actually its in the first sentence where he says this "And here lies the cause of Ireland's great problem. Her democratic will has constantly been suppressed by the Capitalist class of Britain and Ireland."

He then goes on to talk about the capitalists of Britian wanting to carve up Ireland for their own ends. He didnt mention Irish capitalists here because it was mainly the British elite who made this decision.




Seriously, this tactic of blaming everything on the British is getting old. It's about time we stopped chasing idealistic nationalist dreams and faced up to our own reality; the main enemies of the Irish working class are the Irish capitalists.

Well if you actually read what was in the essay instead of spouting your own pre-concieved sect like opinions of what republican socialists stand for then we might actually get some serious dbate started, thats the firstthing that has to happen.


If you disagree with religious hatred and sectarianism then why fan the flames of nationalism,

Where does the essay do this? We are republican socialists,not nationalists. Nationalism didnt enter this essay, why have you decided to use this stereotype to make a point? Its obvious, your using all the tricks in the book to try and discredit anything republican. Your more sectarian than us. I find it really funny that sections of the Irish left label Republicans sectarian when its them who act like a sect. Republican socialists will work with any progressives, catholic,protestant,SP,SWP etc,.. sadly the same cant be said for alot of the so called left in Ireland.



First of all, Republicanism is the cause of sectarianism, not the cure.

Care to tell us how exactly? Republicanism certainly int perfect, but to say its the cause of sectarianism in Ireland is just an awfull lie.



And it is disingenuous for you to preach Republicanism as an end to poverty and the wealth gap, especially when the word "socialism" doesn't appear once in the quoted paragraph.


Where did the writer say this? he said republicans wouldnt stop being active untill a system was in place that best tackled our social ills. Your putting words in his mouth which he didnt say, thats dishonest and everybody can see this.


And finally, blaming Unionists for poverty and homelessness is completely insane.

Again coming to conclusions that their are no basis or evidence for. Show me where the writer said poverty and homelessness was the Unionists fault?


You're acting as if all Republicans/Irish people are staunch socialists or something. Most Republicans are no better than most Unionists when it comes to addressing the imbalance between classes.

Maybe i agree with you, but the writer doesnt make this assumtion. Care to show us where he does?

Qwerty Dvorak
4th February 2008, 21:58
"republican terrorists":laugh: I think we can guess that your opinion on this essay is tainted by hatred for anything republican. You also show-in this first paragraph-an absolute ignorance of what happened in the civil rights movement. To blame republicans for the violent turn of the movement is off the wall. Its an accepted fact that it was stormonts sectarian response to the peaceful demands that caused the movement to take a more aggressive approach. They used their puppets (Loyalists and RUC) to attack the movement in the hope of suppressing it, this is what caused the reaction from the movement, not "republican terrorists",as you claim.
Are you denying that there are Republican terrorists? Are you denying that certain individuals or organizations have targeted members of the civilian populations of Ireland and the UK in the name of Republicanism?

And it was sectarianism that tore apart the civil rights movement. I wasn't trying to exclusively blame Republicans for the souring but they did play their part, mainly through the bombing of commercial and civilian targets.


Its the position of republican socialists that the people own the land, North,South,East and West. And anyone who disagrees would be seen as a traitor to their class. Is this not your position as a socialist?
That's bullshit. It is your position that the Irish own the land, North, South, East and West. Their being people has nothing to do with it; there are plenty of Unionist [i]people whose opinion you simply reject because you feel that you and your compatriots have a right to decide who owns their land.


For the same reasons that the SP lost its seats in the free state or that socialists in the south cant get a majority. I would have thought it obvious to a socialist that the workers class consciousness is not at a level where they would be voting for social change.
Yes, and to try and impose communism on the people today and tomorrow would be undemocratic. The workers don't want communism because they have not yet achieved class consciousness, we must try to educate them and win their support by working with them but to impose communism on them against their will would be a disaster.

The difference between communism and Republicanism though is that one day the workers will inevitably realize that socialism and communism are in their best interests, objectively, from a materialist point of view. Republicanism cannot enjoy such a claim. There is nothing to suggest that one day Unionists will achieve "nation consciousness" and realize that being Irish is actually any objectively, materialistically better than being British. Nor should they, as it doesn't make any sense.


He was making the point that the vote of 1918 was a democratic one and it was wrongfully suppressed, do you not agree?
I agree. But do two wrongs make a right?


Im glad your in a funny mood because whats really funny is that in the section you quoted it clearly debunks your assumption that the writer is saying "Irish capitalists have nothing to do with it".

Actually its in the first sentence where he says this [I]"And here lies the cause of Ireland's great problem. Her democratic will has constantly been suppressed by the Capitalist class of Britain and Ireland."

He then goes on to talk about the capitalists of Britian wanting to carve up Ireland for their own ends. He didnt mention Irish capitalists here because it was mainly the British elite who made this decision.

Well then the article contradicts itself. In one instance it blames the capitalist class of both Britain and Ireland, and in the next it says that "[e]verything stems from the undemocratic decisions taken by the British Capitalists". Well which is it? (Note the use of the word "everything")


Well if you actually read what was in the essay instead of spouting your own pre-concieved sect like opinions of what republican socialists stand for then we might actually get some serious dbate started, thats the firstthing that has to happen.
So you don't actually blame the British or British rule in NI for the current state of things? Then surely removal of this rule isn't a necessary prerequisite for revolution or socialism?


Where does the essay do this? We are republican socialists,not nationalists. Nationalism didnt enter this essay, why have you decided to use this stereotype to make a point? Its obvious, your using all the tricks in the book to try and discredit anything republican. Your more sectarian than us. I find it really funny that sections of the Irish left label Republicans sectarian when its them who act like a sect.
This is something that is often claimed, but pray tell, what is the difference between nationalism and Republicanism?


Republican socialists will work with any progressives, catholic,protestant,SP,SWP etc,.. sadly the same cant be said for alot of the so called left in Ireland.
What about the PUP? Would Republican Socialists work with them? I know they are not revolutionary but surely they are progressive relative to most mainstream NI political parties. They campaign on working class issues and their stated aim is to try and improve workers' conditions in NI. So would you gladly march under the same banner as the PUP?


Care to tell us how exactly? Republicanism certainly int perfect, but to say its the cause of sectarianism in Ireland is just an awfull lie.
Anything that preaches its own subjective view as the only answer to the national question causes sectarianism. I have said before that workers are divided more by nationalism than nationality itself. the fact of the matter is that if Republicanism didn't exist the workers of NI would be a whole lot less divided.


Where did the writer say this? he said republicans wouldnt stop being active untill a system was in place that best tackled our social ills. Your putting words in his mouth which he didnt say, thats dishonest and everybody can see this.
The author claims that Republicans cannot "get over it" because the problem has not been solved; he then identifies part of this problem as the existence of an economic gap, homelessness etc. But he fails to state how Republicanism remedies these ills. That the author believes that British rule or the Unionists are the cause of these problems is therefore a reasonable inference to draw, since these are the main enemies of Republicans.


Again coming to conclusions that their are no basis or evidence for. Show me where the writer said poverty and homelessness was the Unionists fault?
See above.


Maybe i agree with you, but the writer doesnt make this assumtion. Care to show us where he does?
The problem has not been solved at source, to give the unionist class a veto over the democratic will of the whole of Ireland was undemocratic in 1920 and still is in 2008.
This implies that the "democratic will of the whole of Ireland", which the author obviously believes to be pro-Republican, is the solution to the problem which includes homelessness, wealth gap etc.

PRC-UTE
4th February 2008, 23:13
note: it's truly odd that you'd describe yourself as a Trotskyist, then attack a piece that basically argues that the working class is the only force capable of resolving the national question, as Trotsky did... but anyway...



What you mean is that the civil rights movement in Northern Ireland was infiltrated by Republican terrorists who wanted to hijack the struggle for their own nationalist ends. This inevitably destroyed the civil rights movement and turned what could have been a time of enlightenment, acceptance and tolerance between Catholic and Protestant workers into one of the most shameful and bloodstained periods in the island's recent history.

What idealist nonsense. The republicans in '69 woulda been please to have the numbers and organisation to hijack a social night in a pub, let alone a mass movement with diverse political tendencies.

Rather than rely on a conspiratorial analysis, let's try to understand history by looking at the structure of the six county northern state: such as how the six county's unionist one-party rule couldn't tolerate the smallest democratic demands and replied with brutal repression.

As for a period 'of enlightenment, acceptance and tolerance between Catholic and Protestant workers' arising from the civil rights movement- are you taking the piss? When Catholic workers demanded democratic rights for workers that would've benifited protestant workers as well, they reacted by physically attacking them, culminating in pogroms.




Partition is undemocratic? Then why can the Republicans not get a majority in Stormont?

The formation of stormont violated all the basic rules of democratic theory. Nearly all of em. It's one of the most classic and most clear cut case studies in rigging election wards ever to exist.




HAHAHA, because the Irish capitalists have *nothing* to do with it. Sure how could they be in the wrong, they're members of our blessed divine race!

This is a pure strawman attack. Never heard a republican socialist say anything like that in my life. We argue that partition benefited the "green" 26 county ruling class, that partition suits them just fine.




First of all, Republicanism is the cause of sectarianism, not the cure. And it is disingenuous for you to preach Republicanism as an end to poverty and the wealth gap, especially when the word "socialism" doesn't appear once in the quoted paragraph. And finally, blaming Unionists for poverty and homelessness is completely insane. You're acting as if all Republicans/Irish people are staunch socialists or something. Most Republicans are no better than most Unionists when it comes to addressing the imbalance between classes.

Well that's not quite true, there's been far more left wing splits within the Republican movement historically, but leaving that aside, I don't see how we can unite the workers when all it takes is waving the union jack and one section of them will wage mass pogroms on the other. But if you can show me where your economist ringroad socialism is succeeding, I'm all ears, m8.

Qwerty Dvorak
4th February 2008, 23:54
Respond to me second post, not my first please. I did a lot of clarifying in my second post.

Connolly
5th February 2008, 02:42
RS1916



This is something that is often claimed, but pray tell, what is the difference between nationalism and Republicanism?



Republicanism is not nationalism. Republican socialists see partition as one of the primary obstacles to achieving working class unity in Ireland. The Northern Ireland statelet was arbitrarily drawn up for the purposes of maintaining British rule, by constructing the demographics with a margin of favour to the loyalist community, and by giving them far greater social, economic and political power. This is the divide an conquer strategy which purposefully creates sectarian conflict to maintain control - and can now be seen implemented by the US and UK governments in Iraq.

The inequalities between the catholic and protestant community in NI might have diminished enough to say that republicanism is unnecessary to achieve socialism, and therefore working class unity, but history has shown - and, simply the demographic capability is there - that Britain can and will use the partition to maintain its control by stirring up sectarianism when the state and the status quo is challenged.

Republican socialists see the removal of partition as a means of removing a major division preventing working class unity and socialism.

It has nothing to do with nationalism.



There is nothing to suggest that one day Unionists will achieve "nation consciousness" and realize that being Irish is actually any objectively, materialistically better than being British. Nor should they, as it doesn't make any sense


'National consciousness' :confused:
Being irish? :confused:

Honestly, neither have anything to do with republican socialism. It is not about nationality, but about removing a sectarian statelet.

Qwerty Dvorak
23rd February 2008, 18:44
If sectarianism and worker division is what you're trying to combat then it would be a hell of a lot more effective to simply drop the Republican label, and you know it. You are claiming that a significant part of the problem in Northern Ireland is the nationality of the ruling class. This is untrue.

Die Neue Zeit
24th February 2008, 01:50
I wonder if the "Connollyist" comrades here have the time to study the international implications of Connolly's works (ie, beyond just Ireland, to include the more popularized national-liberation struggles, such as Vietnam).