INLA patrol in North Belfast, July 11th 2008

[Seven Stars]

Volunteers of the Irish National Liberation Army patrol in North Belfast, July 11th 2008.

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/6886/40872214rn2.jpg

http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/7901/25588406ew1.jpg

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/5626/89862412fh0.jpg

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/3671/27290549in2.jpg

http://img91.imageshack.us/img91/8019/71211898mi3.jpg

http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/1685/99223356xm1.jpg

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Ulster socialist will appaer on this thread within the next twenty four hours i guarantee it.

[Dr Mindbender]

he he 72 hours or so later...

im pretty sure those pics were taken not far from my old school!

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

bastard you abstained from posting because i said that :(

[Pogue]

Them guys look like a bunch of tossers.

[Dr Mindbender]

Them guys look like a bunch of tossers.

i cant think of anyone else in the british isles willing to walk around in public with an AK-47 in the name of socialism, i'll give them that.

[YKTMX]

I'm surprised they even get away with this anymore.

Do the British Army still even patrol the streets? Seems all a bit amatuerish but, whatever, more power to them.

[Pogue]

Why would they do this? Walk around Belfast at night with a bunch of rifles? I think its clear to see armed struggle is no longer the way in Ireland, it's dead, the IRA has stopped the fight, it's time for peace now. These guys are just fufilling their childish boyish dreams of getting to wave guns around 'fighting the power'.
The reason no one else in the British Isles walks around with an AK-47 calling for socialism is because most socialists in the British Isles arent idiots.
Socialist Republicanism should be fought for through peaceful and democratic means.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Why would they do this? Walk around Belfast at night with a bunch of rifles? I think its clear to see armed struggle is no longer the way in Ireland, it's dead, the IRA has stopped the fight, it's time for peace now. These guys are just fufilling their childish boyish dreams of getting to wave guns around 'fighting the power'.
The reason no one else in the British Isles walks around with an AK-47 calling for socialism is because most socialists in the British Isles arent idiots.
Socialist Republicanism should be fought for through peaceful and democratic means.

I am i going to call him a reformist or are one of you guys gonna do it?

[Wanted Man]

I am i going to call him a reformist or are one of you guys gonna do it?

In all fairness, one could question what the point of such a 'patrol' is. But I don't know anything about the situation. Can somebody provide enlightenment?

[Pogue]

Violence didn't work in Ireland, everyones moved on. Thats not reformism, its reality.
The original IRA, Irish liberation fighters, the ones who fought the Black and Tans and were killed at the GPO in 1916, they were the revolutionaries, the heroes. Bobby Sands also.

[Pogue]

Well, I don't want to give you a whole lecture on Irish history, search on Wikipedia "The troubles", and any articles to do with British involvement in Ireland, or the IRA. But basically, both sides of the fight, republicans and loyalists, have turned to peace and parliammentary democracy. Which was neccesary. No one could win the civil war that was being fought. The armed groups around today who claim to be some form fo IRA or National liberation Army are involved in pointless violence and crime.

[Redmau5]

i cant think of anyone else in the british isles willing to walk around in public with an AK-47 in the name of socialism, i'll give them that.

The name of socialism? It was a tribal show of strength, nothing more.


In all fairness, one could question what the point of such a 'patrol' is. But I don't know anything about the situation. Can somebody provide enlightenment?Apparently, the INLA were patrolling the streets in case there was a loyalist attack of some sort. It was the 11th of July, a night when loyalists in Northern Ireland light large bonfires to celebarte victory over catholics 400 years ago. There has been violence in the past at such events between nationalists and loyalists, but there was little to no violence at the recent 11th night bonfires. I can't really understand why the INLA felt the need to parade around the streets with weapons.

And H-L-V-S, you don't really have any idea what you're talking about.

[progressive_lefty]

Why would they do this? Walk around Belfast at night with a bunch of rifles? I think its clear to see armed struggle is no longer the way in Ireland, it's dead, the IRA has stopped the fight, it's time for peace now. These guys are just fufilling their childish boyish dreams of getting to wave guns around 'fighting the power'.
The reason no one else in the British Isles walks around with an AK-47 calling for socialism is because most socialists in the British Isles aren't idiots.
Socialist Republicanism should be fought for through peaceful and democratic means.

As someone of Irish heritage, and former supporter of the IRA, I couldn't support your post anymore. The weapon now should be demographics and the ballot box. But these days, I'm willing to admit that it may not even be of too much use re-unifying Ireland, when the Northern Irish-Catholics may be suited to being part of Briton. That's just a comment, I'm not telling the Northern Irish what to do.

[Pogue]

The name of socialism? It was a tribal show of strength, nothing more.

Apparently, the INLA were patrolling the streets in case there was a loyalist attack of some sort. It was the 11th of July, a night when loyalists in Northern Ireland light large bonfires to celebarte victory over catholics 400 years ago. There has been violence in the past at such events between nationalists and loyalists, but there was little to no violence at the recent 11th night bonfires. I can't really understand why the INLA felt the need to parade around the streets with weapons.

And H-L-V-S, you don't really have any idea what you're talking about.

Wow, you sure proved me wrong with your articulate and inteligent rebuttal of my opinions and analysis. Dam.

[Malakangga]

wow !!!
i can't say anything

[Connolly]

HLVS:



Violence didn't work in Ireland, everyones moved on. Thats not reformism, its reality.



Violence did work in Ireland, many a time. An INLA example:

"Offensive INLA actions at this time included the 1982 bombing of the Mount Gabriel radar station in County Cork (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/County_Cork), which was providing assistance to North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO), allegedly in violation of Irish neutrality (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_neutrality)"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_National_Liberation_Army

Photo: http://flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/2357622193/ (http://flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/2357622193/)

"bombing of the Mount Gabriel radar station near Cork, Ireland, exposing the violation of Irish neutrality through the station having been used to supply information to NATO."

http://irsm.org/history/whatis.html

"Other noted actions included the 1982 bombing of the Mount Gabriel radar station in County Cork (http://www.irelandinformationguide.com/County_Cork) which, in providing assistance to NATO (http://www.irelandinformationguide.com/NATO), was considered by the INLA to be acting in violation of Irish neutrality;"

http://www.irelandinformationguide.com/Irish_National_Liberation_Army

------------------------------------

Nah. ""Popular"" peaceful protests are always better arnt they.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=0h12RZtxqbo

Brick by brick, up she goes. Placards and prayers wont do anything to stop its construction, I can tell you that much.

To you, it seems, things are either black or white. Armed struggle or peace. There exists a grey, a grey that can destroy things not wanted.

[Pogue]

Connolly, what a stupid argument you make. So a few cases of violence have unconvered things?
The violence between the IRA/UDA/British Army did not solve any problems. Many innocent people were injured or killed. And I don't support any state violence against protestors. But running around with AK's and bombs doesnt solve a centuries old conflict. Dialogue and debate are the path those in Ireland must take.
Violence didn't work in Ireland.

[Lector Malibu]

I respectfully disagree. There was a time when the Provisional IRA had no choice.

I'm not flogging a dead horse but the events of January 30th 1972 and the battle for the Bog side were some of these times.

[progressive_lefty]

Connolly, what a stupid argument you make. So a few cases of violence have unconvered things?
The violence between the IRA/UDA/British Army did not solve any problems. Many innocent people were injured or killed. And I don't support any state violence against protestors. But running around with AK's and bombs doesnt solve a centuries old conflict. Dialogue and debate are the path those in Ireland must take.
Violence didn't work in Ireland.

Non-violence now is justified.
But to expect the Irish people not to resist the brutal occupation, despite how extreme they may have acted, is ridiculous.

[Lector Malibu]

Non-violence now is justified.
But to expect the Irish people not to resist the brutal occupation, despite how extreme they may have acted, is ridiculous.

And there is still Loyalist Paramilitary that pull all kinds of violent antics and what not.

Over all I agree it would be nice to see all of the former tactics come to an end. However I said it before and I'll say it again, it's not like the IRA and Sands and support just woke up one day and said "hmmm let's fight the British"

[Pogue]

I said that violence didn't solve anything. It didn't resolve the issues in Northern Ireland. It didn't improve life for anyone.

[Connolly]

HLVS:



Connolly, what a stupid argument you make. So a few cases of violence have unconvered things?
The violence between the IRA/UDA/British Army did not solve any problems. Many innocent people were injured or killed. And I don't support any state violence against protestors. But running around with AK's and bombs doesnt solve a centuries old conflict. Dialogue and debate are the path those in Ireland must take.
Violence didn't work in Ireland.


Again, violence used by groups such as the INLA doesnt have to solve "the centuries old conflict".

The use of violence dosnt have to equal "armed struggle".

Violent actions can solve practical problems. As I said - if you dont want something being constructed, but where 'popular' action will not work within the limited time frame available - then a bomb will destroy it.

It has nothing to do with armed struggle, or killing civilians, or solving partition, - but with solving an immediate and practical problem that a placard and megaphone just wont do.

Armed struggle failed (ie. Trying to wage a guerrilla war to force the British out militarily).

But whats stupid, is to say that because that failed - violent actions in general also fail, and that the only option is through peaceful means.

As for 'patrolling the streets', well, there is a significant base of support for the INLA in the North. Its a show of strength, saying "we are here" and not gone away. This particular stunt failed but i wont go into it.

[Redmau5]

Wow, you sure proved me wrong with your articulate and inteligent rebuttal of my opinions and analysis. Dam.

Ok will.


Dialogue and debate are the path those in Ireland must take.

So you support the current sectarian "peace process" in Northern Ireland? As a socialist, I thought you would have taken the approach of rejecting the two main reactionary parties (Sinn Fein and the DUP). I also thought you would have recognised that while the bombings and shootings may have stopped, sectarian division between catholics and protestants remains as deeply-rooted as ever.

But no, you instead wheel out some liberal crap about "dialogue and debate", and at the same time completely ignore the historical conditions which allowed sectarian violence and tension to ferment in the first place.

Anyway, this is getting off-topic.

[Panda Tse Tung]

better to be safe then to be sorry, thats what i think 'bout the patrol.

[Pogue]

Ok will.



So you support the current sectarian "peace process" in Northern Ireland? As a socialist, I thought you would have taken the approach of rejecting the two main reactionary parties (Sinn Fein and the DUP). I also thought you would have recognised that while the bombings and shootings may have stopped, sectarian division between catholics and protestants remains as deeply-rooted as ever.

But no, you instead wheel out some liberal crap about "dialogue and debate", and at the same time completely ignore the historical conditions which allowed sectarian violence and tension to ferment in the first place.

Anyway, this is getting off-topic.

Yes, peace and resolving conflicts through comprimise and dialogue is crap(?). This conflict was one between Loyalists and Republicans, and it was a violent conflict, so I would support peaceful negotiations between the two.
Yes, I would like a socialist Ireland. It is what I want. I also want a socialist USA, a socialist Europe, a socialist Middle East. But with problems in the here and now, thats not practical, because there are divides and problems that run deep between different people across the world, which wont just be solved by telling them to become socialists.

[Dr Mindbender]

Violence didn't work in Ireland, everyones moved on. Thats not reformism, its reality.
The original IRA, Irish liberation fighters, the ones who fought the Black and Tans and were killed at the GPO in 1916, they were the revolutionaries, the heroes. Bobby Sands also.

id tend to disagree with the IRA part. The mainstream IRA supported a united ireland under beourgiose democracy, not socialism. The IRSM/INLA came about for that reason that which is why IRA reactionaries started attacking IRSP comrades.

[Dr Mindbender]

...also regarding the question as to why these patrols take place, loyalist death squads with a vendetta against roman catholics are very much still live, armed and operational.

I think thats a pretty damn good reason to be having patrols.

[Pogue]

Do you really think 5 guys with a tendency to pose as they do in that last photo will stop these death squads? Death squads really can only be dealt with by the army/police. But I don't fully know what their position is. Please link also to your sources on these death squads, never heard of them still being active, existing today or killing anyone recently.
And I meant the IRA were heroes in resisting the British Army/Black and Tans back when they needed to be physically fought. And I also referred to the Irish Citizens Army in that sentence, James Connolly and the like.

[Dr Mindbender]

http://www.4ni.co.uk/northern_ireland_news.asp?id=67912


01 November 2007Community Project Pays Price Of UDA Violence


The axe has finally fallen on the promised £1.2m UDA-linked conflict transformation scheme for the regeneration of loyalist areas.

The Department of Social Development has served notice of termination to Farset, the independent organisation appointed to oversee the project.

The notice was issued on Tuesday, two weeks after DSD Minister Margaret Ritchie said the funding would end.

The delay was due to legal issues and disagreements within the Assembly Executive over how to proceed.

Mrs Ritchie originally set a deadline for the Ulster Defence Association (UDA) to begin giving up guns after repeated violence linked to the loyalist group.

However, the UDA said it would adhere to its 'own timetable' for getting rid of its weapons.

In a statement to the Assembly earlier this month, Ms Ritchie said the actions of the UDA had meant the retention of the Conflict Transformation Initiative originally proposed by then NI Secretary of State, Peter Hain could not be justified.

In a separate development yesterday, eight men were arrested in connection with so-called dissident republican activity.

Police said a number of items were recovered after house searches in Londonderry and Strabane.

Seven of those arrested on Wednesday are understood to be from Strabane and one from Derry. All were arrested under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. They were taken to Antrim PSNI station's specialist facility for questioning.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Posing with guns: about as masculine and effective as putting a brick through a window.

Patrolling unarmed: about as clever and effective as getting shot in the face.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

And the relevance of sectarian conflicts in class struggle? If these people were actually serious about 'patrolling' from whatever perceived violence, then they would not pose for pictures with their weapons and post them on the internet. Macho bullshit.

I dont know why the bothred to take photos but as said before they were preventing loyalists fucking people up on a day in which loyalists are known to do that sht.

[Dr Mindbender]

And the relevance of sectarian conflicts in class struggle? If these people were actually serious about 'patrolling' from whatever perceived violence, then they would not pose for pictures with their weapons and post them on the internet. Macho bullshit.
The INLA are not sectarian. There is no rule in their organisation that prevents protestants from joining it, neither do they target protestant civillians.

[jaffe]

No they call themselves CRF when they carry out sectarian atttacks.

[Dr Mindbender]

No they call themselves CRF when they carry out sectarian atttacks.
yeah those killings that werent sanctioned by the leadership.

[Lector Malibu]

Ultimately I support both the provisional IRA and the INLA. they are both groups of freedom fighters in my eyes.

Heck I support anyone that does not support the British agenda in NI be it a kid with a rock or a hunger striker

Up the Ra !

[Dr Mindbender]

Ultimately I support both the provisional IRA and the INLA. they are both groups of freedom fighters in my eyes.

Heck I support anyone that does not support the British agenda in NI be it a kid with a rock or a hunger striker

Up the Ra !
the killing of Seamus Costello was out of order though.

[Lector Malibu]

the killing of Seamus Costello was out of order though.

Yes I agree. I'm not saying they were perfect by any means. Yes there was corruption and what happened to Seamus was sickening.

However fact is that the British still control six counties in Ireland. The fight needs to continue though by any means necessary.

[Dr Mindbender]

Yes I agree. I'm not saying they were perfect by any means. Yes there was corruption and what happened to Seamus was sickening.

However fact is that the British still control six counties in Ireland. The fight needs to continue though by any means necessary.

Sinn Fein dont seem to think so. Sadly to say the IRSM isnt the voice of mainstream republicanism by any measure.

[Lector Malibu]

Sinn Fein dont seem to think so. Sadly to say the IRSM isnt the voice of mainstream republicanism by any measure.

This is true as well. Sinn Fein sold out plain and simple.

[bolshevik butcher]

I said that violence didn't solve anything. It didn't resolve the issues in Northern Ireland. It didn't improve life for anyone.

I think that you may have said something that implied something quite different from what you actually meant to. The formulation that you have presented here is a gross and ridiculous generalisation that also reads in a very talk-down approach to the Irish comrades in pariticular.

It is entirely correct in my view to say that the armed struggle/urban guerilla methods have led the Irish republican movement and working class down a dead end and have inevitbaly led to the situation now where Sinn Fein administers British rule in the north of Ireland and a united Ireland is as far off the cards as it has been at any point since 1921.

This does not however validate a pacifist approach. I would cite approach of the IRSM and the tradition of James Connolly and Jim Larkin. Republican Socialism is not by any means a pacifist outlook but the understanding that only through the socialist revolution can a united Ireland be achieved. This is to say only through the organisation of the Irish working class accross sectarian lines struggeling for their own interest as a class against the forces of capitalism and imperialism can their emerge a united and socialist Ireland. This does not imply a pacafist approach far from it. As a Marxist I certainly am not a fetishist for violence but I understand that when it comes to the question of power the ruling class will fight tooth and nail to keep hold of it.


This is true as well. Sinn Fein sold out plain and simple.

I do not think that it is just as simple as this. Yes it is certianly true that the leadership of Sinn Fein have betrayed the support they recieved from the nationalist working class and all those that sacrificed so much including spending years in prison many their lives in the armed struggle but it is not as simple as saying that they sold out. PSF's leadership was always based on a cross class nationalist outlook, and they have always suppressed genuine socialist tendencies within the repulican movement, including the republican communist tendency that emerged among the IRA prisoners and of course the IRSM. Without a class approach to the national liberation struggle the PSF leadership went down the road of armed struggle which it became increasingly aware that it could not win. Of course their actions since were despicable but they originate from this narrow minded nationalist outlook. During the 80's the armed struggled became a campaign to gain as many concessions as possible from British Impeiralism in what eventually emerged as the Good Friday Agreement.

I would highly reccomend reading Gerry Ruddy's1967-2007 overview of Ireland for a more thorough analysis from someone who was a Marxist who was active in Ireland throughout the troubles and continues to be so- http://www.marxist.com/ireland-an-overview-1967-2007.htm

[Louis Pio]

Provisional IRA had no choice.

The reactionary provisional IRA was exactly the reason why socialists needed to arm themselves, im well aware INLA later ended up being for a large part petty criminals, luckily those days are over. Let's not forget how the provisional IRA's greatest goal was to wipe out socialism in Ireland, I find it strange how "socialists" can support that. Anyway why should socialists "disarm", to anyone with a bit of brains it's pretty clear that there can come a time were socialists once again has to protect themselves physically in Ireland, or should they just hope for "the friendly state" to do that? As long as the weapons aren't kept for continuing the stupid tactic of individual terrorism it's fine by me.

Edit: hadn't seen BB's post, I totally agree with it

[Lector Malibu]

The reactionary provisional IRA was exactly the reason why socialists needed to arm themselves, im well aware INLA later ended up being for a large part petty criminals, luckily those days are over. Let's not forget how the provisional IRA's greatest goal was to wipe out socialism in Ireland, I find it strange how "socialists" can support that. Anyway why should socialists "disarm", to anyone with a bit of brains it's pretty clear that there can come a time were socialists once again has to protect themselves physically in Ireland, or should they just hope for "the friendly state" to do that? As long as the weapons aren't kept for continuing the stupid tactic of individual terrorism it's fine by me.

Edit: hadn't seen BB's post, I totally agree with it

If you're going to quote me I would apreciate it if you would do just that next time.

My actual post.

I respectfully disagree. There was a time when the Provisional IRA had no choice. I'm not flogging a dead horse but the events of January 30th 1972 and the battle for the Bog side were some of these times.

[Vendetta]

Let's not forget how the provisional IRA's greatest goal was to wipe out socialism in Ireland, I find it strange how "socialists" can support that.

Really?

[Magdalen]

I'd like to recommend an excellent book, which helped me form a far more accurate picture of the Irish struggle. It's title is "Ireland: The key to the British revolution", and it was written by David Reed, a notable member of the Revolutionary Communist Group.

In it, Reed examines the history of the Irish struggle, and its relevance to the British working class from the late 1840s to the book's publication (1984). Although it describes many different areas, the eighth chapter stands out. In this chapter he describes the split in the republican movement which occurred in late 1969.

Reed states that revisionist elements within the IRA leadership left it unprepared to defend the nationalist minority as the Civil Rights Movement was forced into conflict with the paramilitary defenders of the loyalist state. By packing the Army Council with their supporters, these elements were able to vote down all proposals for the defence of nationalist areas in the six counties, with one member even suggesting the nationalists should look to the British Army for protection from paramilitaries and the RUC. Driven by the necessity of defending of their communities the Belfast Brigade decided to have nothing to do with the Dublin leadership. At the Army Convention of December 1969, the leadership argued that the IRA should enter into an alliance with organisations of the so-called "communist" and "socialist" left, which had helped shape the revisionist stance of the IRA leadership. Those who opposed this alliance were forced to resign. In order to defend the Irish people, they formed the Provisional IRA.

This concrete, concise analysis, completely refutes the point made above, which states that "the provisional IRA's greatest goal was to wipe out socialism in Ireland", nothing could be further from the truth. The Provisional IRA's greatest goal was to defend the Irish people from British imperialism.

As German revolutionary Rosa Leviné-Meyer wrote, in a passage she attributed to V.I Lenin:

To be really "objective" we must first decide on which side we stand: with the oppressed or with the tenacious champions of the privileged minority

[Louis Pio]

Really?

Yes that kinda comes with defending capitalism


If you're going to quote me I would apreciate it if you would do just that next time.

My actual post.

I respectfully disagree. There was a time when the Provisional IRA had no choice. I'm not flogging a dead horse but the events of January 30th 1972 and the battle for the Bog side were some of these times.


Sorry, I read it as that you supported the provos

[Lector Malibu]

Yes that kinda comes with defending capitalism



Sorry, I read it as that you supported the provos

I've supported many people who have fought for the liberation of the occupied six counties of NI . PIRA included. If you go back and read the thread I've also stated that I have not always agreed with they're tactics.

And sorry but I need to address something with you. Why did you come flailing on to this thread (witch was actually quite civil granted ) not even bother to quote my post properly and leave some scathing post to me ??

I've reacted on post as well. I think we all have. This one though is already on the edge and does not need to digress into that Teis.

[Louis Pio]

Paddy I have to respectfully disagree and im not really sure if the book you refer to is worth a read, since it's conclusions seems quite superficial.
Now it's true that a small part of the IRA leadership over a weekend decided that the goal was a socialist republic, this without serious debate among the membership. However this was in no way ideological but rather oppotunism of the worst kind put forward because their militaristic outlook was quite close to that of stalinism. That this was not ideological can for example been seen by the fact that a rightwinger like Tommy MacGiolla supported this.
But should this mean that one should have supported the provos unconditionally like you suggest? The provisional movement swung left and right many times after what the leadership found oppotune and it was limited by it's focus only on military measures while abandoning mass struggle and not reaching out to protestant workers whatsoever. In the end that lead them to the signing of the good friday agreement and the abandonement of any allegiance to what they formerly claimed to stand for.

Anyway I wan't to retract a bit, I made a bit of an overstatement when claiming that the provisional IRA as a whole sought to smash socialism, and for that I appologise. However it is quite clear that parts of the provisional IRA was used for exactly that and this was sanctioned by the leadership, the murder of Seamus Costello is an example of that.

All the leadership of the provisional IRA used the political concessions for, won through the armed struggle, was to transform themselves into bourgious mainstream politicians and firm defenders of capitalism as seen today, I think that says more than any revolutionary vocabulary they might have used in the past. The result is that Ireland both north and south is still controlled by England through it's financial institutions, as Connely predicted would happen if the fight for socialism wasn't carried through.

Btw what do you mean with "revisionist" in your post? It's one of the most misused words on the left and can practically mean everything which is why one should always explain what is meant by it. Do you mean revisionist in the sense that you think anything but strict focus on armed struggle is revisionist?

Flower Eater, as I said im sorry. It's a bit late here and that always makes my fuse shorter for no reason while impairing my reading skills.

[Lector Malibu]

Thank you. No worries. I retract my negative rep point. (it wasn't that bad) and will be happy to get back on topic.

[bolshevik butcher]

On the question of the formation of the Provisional IRA. It is deffinatley true that the Official IRA leadership did veer towards a pacifist/reformist outlook in a demogogic supposed turn to the left that involved dropping the issue of the national liberation of Ireland in exchange for exclusively campaigning on social issues in an oppertunist attempt to win over loyalist workers. This form of economism was labeled gas and water socialism by James Connolly in the early twentieth century when similar moves were tried and also predictable failed then.

I've outlined above my views on the direction that the provisional IRA took in my post at the start of the page, but I would like to address this question on the defence of nationalist areas. The truth of the matter is no matter what they were formed to do, and I don't doubt that this is what the rank and file volunteers at the very least saw the defence of nationalist areas as being an important part of their role the provisional IRA consistantly failed to defend nationalist areas when push came to shove. In 1969 it was Official IRA members that defended Derry where there was any IRA activity. In 1972 there was no opposition to operation motorman, when the British Army seized the liberated zone in Derry and similarly was unable to defend the liberated zone that ecompased much of west Belfast.

The PSF leadership was uninterested in building a mass movement, it was shown in the roll that they played in the defence committees in Free Derry and most graphically during the hunger strikes when a potential mass movment htat oculd have played a leading role in shifting the balance of forces in the north of Ireland was gien a subsiduary role due to the elevated importance that was given to the armed struggle.

Lenin was a communist revolutionary who argued vigorously in defence of the indepence of the working class in terms of organisation and politics. I think it would be wrong to use one line of Lenin as cover for support for the provisiional IRA given their class content and the tactics that they have followed. Lenin argued that it is through the actions of the mass of working class people and not through heroic fightes from above that the socialist revolution will be made, it was through "patiently explaining" to the working class that the bolsheviks were able to lead the Russian workers to the conquest of power in 1917. This is in my view the only method for building for socialist revolution although obviously it takes different forms in different times and places. The embryo of such action was seein in Derry in 1969,

"The electric events in Northern Ireland have shaken to their roots the Unionist Stormont Government and shocked out of its sedate calm the British ruling class. The bloody clashes in Derry, Belfast and other towns has meant that the Catholic population is no longer prepared to accept the writ of a Government which rules by police and Paisleyite terror. Forced to defend their area of the Bogside the Catholic workers have taken over the running, policing and organisation of the area through the establishment of defence committees. At the same time ‑ and it is this more than anything which will strike terror into the hearts of the capitalists ‑ an increasing section have begun to see their fight not in a religious form but as a class issue. "
http://www.marxist.com/british-marxists-opposed-troops-north-ireland-1969.htm

It was not enough in itself but it is worth remembering in such events perhaps we saw the embryos of a revolutionary sitaution, a potential way forward that was left to rot due to the incorrect approach of the economism of the officials and the nationalist militarism of the provisionals.

[Jorge Miguel]

Reed states that revisionist elements within the IRA leadership left it unprepared to defend the nationalist minority as the Civil Rights Movement was forced into conflict with the paramilitary defenders of the loyalist state. By packing the Army Council with their supporters, these elements were able to vote down all proposals for the defence of nationalist areas in the six counties, with one member even suggesting the nationalists should look to the British Army for protection from paramilitaries and the RUC. Driven by the necessity of defending of their communities the Belfast Brigade decided to have nothing to do with the Dublin leadership. At the Army Convention of December 1969, the leadership argued that the IRA should enter into an alliance with organisations of the so-called "communist" and "socialist" left, which had helped shape the revisionist stance of the IRA leadership. Those who opposed this alliance were forced to resign. In order to defend the Irish people, they formed the Provisional IRA.This revisionist mantra has become commonplace in history. It is a inaccurate first and foremost to suggest that the Provisional IRA split from the movement to defend the Irish people. The Scarman Tribunal shows accurately the number of wounded B-Specials in the Lower Falls area in August 1969. The guns where there, but there was not enough people to use them. This is owed to the anti-communist current within the Republican Movement who largely resigned around the time of the Republican Movement declaring its shift to the left in July 1966. Ruairi O Bradaigh of the Provisional IRA and Sinn Féin became known in the early 70s as 'the wedge against communism in Ireland'. The diatribe which filled the pages of the Republican News and An Phoblacht from the early 70s is enough to confirm this but the coup de grace is the 1973 Provisional IRA pamphlet called 'Freedom Struggle'.

“We, the lawful leadership of the republican movement, ... publicly declare our objective to be the establishment of a democratic socialist republic based on the proclamation of 1916 and on Christian principles. Accordingly we reject the atheistic Marxism ... and we are supremely confident that the overwhelming majority of the Irish people will reject this alien philosophy” (IRA statement An Phoblacht/Republican News October 1971, p2)

The British left of course supported the Provisional IRA without criticism in their droves but now have no explanation for their current position.

[Pogue]

I think that you may have said something that implied something quite different from what you actually meant to. The formulation that you have presented here is a gross and ridiculous generalisation that also reads in a very talk-down approach to the Irish comrades in pariticular.

It is entirely correct in my view to say that the armed struggle/urban guerilla methods have led the Irish republican movement and working class down a dead end and have inevitbaly led to the situation now where Sinn Fein administers British rule in the north of Ireland and a united Ireland is as far off the cards as it has been at any point since 1921.

This does not however validate a pacifist approach. I would cite approach of the IRSM and the tradition of James Connolly and Jim Larkin. Republican Socialism is not by any means a pacifist outlook but the understanding that only through the socialist revolution can a united Ireland be achieved. This is to say only through the organisation of the Irish working class accross sectarian lines struggeling for their own interest as a class against the forces of capitalism and imperialism can their emerge a united and socialist Ireland. This does not imply a pacafist approach far from it. As a Marxist I certainly am not a fetishist for violence but I understand that when it comes to the question of power the ruling class will fight tooth and nail to keep hold of it.



I do not think that it is just as simple as this. Yes it is certianly true that the leadership of Sinn Fein have betrayed the support they recieved from the nationalist working class and all those that sacrificed so much including spending years in prison many their lives in the armed struggle but it is not as simple as saying that they sold out. PSF's leadership was always based on a cross class nationalist outlook, and they have always suppressed genuine socialist tendencies within the repulican movement, including the republican communist tendency that emerged among the IRA prisoners and of course the IRSM. Without a class approach to the national liberation struggle the PSF leadership went down the road of armed struggle which it became increasingly aware that it could not win. Of course their actions since were despicable but they originate from this narrow minded nationalist outlook. During the 80's the armed struggled became a campaign to gain as many concessions as possible from British Impeiralism in what eventually emerged as the Good Friday Agreement.

I would highly reccomend reading Gerry Ruddy's1967-2007 overview of Ireland for a more thorough analysis from someone who was a Marxist who was active in Ireland throughout the troubles and continues to be so- http://www.marxist.com/ireland-an-overview-1967-2007.htm

I am one of those Irish comrades. And I understand the situation in Ireland well, better than many, and in my opinion, better than some others on this board.

[bolshevik butcher]

I thought you'd said in another thread that you were English, I'm sorry. I would be interested in continuing the discusson and seeing your response.

Ich bin ein Berliner, I share your criticsms of much of the British left at the time and your view on the emergence of the provos. However the Militant tendency consistantly upheld opposition to the sending of British troops to Ireland (while many others on the left welcomed them as an apparent neutral force) and warned against blind support for the provos and where their methods would lead.

[Hessian Peel]

Why would they do this? Walk around Belfast at night with a bunch of rifles?

It's nothing more than militarist posturing and you're rightly opposed to it, but criticism should only be given in the proper context. The Irish people, and indeed all the peoples of the world, have a right to be armed.


I think its clear to see armed struggle is no longer the way in Ireland, it's dead For now at least. I don't think an armed campaign of any kind would be successful right now in any Western exploiter-nation.


the IRA has stopped the fight, it's time for peace now. Indeed, they've completely capitulated to a British agenda. They're finished and so are Sinn Féin.


The reason no one else in the British Isles walks around with an AK-47 calling for socialism is because most socialists in the British Isles arent idiots.Yea, sure. :rolleyes:


Socialist Republicanism should be fought for through peaceful and democratic means. That's a utopian pacifist viewpoint. The conditions at present do not favour armed struggle, but the time will come when the bullet and the bomb are needed once again.

[Hessian Peel]

I am one of those Irish comrades. And I understand the situation in Ireland well, better than many, and in my opinion, better than some others on this board.

I would have forgiven you for your opinions had you been a comrade from outside the country. :(

[Pogue]

The only opinion I have given is that violent groups are pointless and that dialogue is needed, to create a comprimise and maintain peace. What's wrong with this?
The IRA was not going to win, but they were not going to lose. The same goes for the British Armed Forces and the Loyalists, they were not going to win or lose. Hence a stalemate, stupid violence, and these paramilitarys ceasing to have any relevance as they become criminal gangs.
I've been called a reformist for calling for peace, dialogue and debate. The alternative is a bloody war between three factions who don't represent the interests of the Irish people. I know which I prefer.

[bolshevik butcher]

Peace between who and on whose terms?

Surely as socialists it is our duty to wage a struggle for a united socialist Ireland. That means nesceserally not accepting Britain's right to rule the north of Ireland, and struggeling against the British impeiralism and also its lackies who it allows to rule in the south.

The methods used in such a struggle does not nesceserally imply a reversion to the failed tactics of the armed struggle which as I outlined earlier in my view is the route of the failure of provisionals and ultimatley the wasted efforts of perhaps three generations of republicans and socialists. It is in my view only through the socialist revolution, that is the mass of the working class taking power and fighting in its own intersts through the method of mass mobolisation can the unification of Ireland be achieved.

I would highly reccomend watching this-
Former H-Block hunger strike and IWU organiser Tommy McKearney speaks at éirígí's James Connolly commemoration in Arbour Hill, Dublin, 10 May 2008.
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=wDdXgLFIy90&feature=user

[Hessian Peel]

Peace between who and on whose terms?

Surely as socialists it is our duty to wage a struggle for a united socialist Ireland. That means nesceserally not accepting Britain's right to rule the north of Ireland, and struggeling against the British impeiralism and also its lackies who it allows to rule in the south.

The methods used in such a struggle does not nesceserally imply a reversion to the failed tactics of the armed struggle which as I outlined earlier in my view is the route of the failure of provisionals and ultimatley the wasted efforts of perhaps three generations of republicans and socialists. It is in my view only through the socialist revolution, that is the mass of the working class taking power and fighting in its own intersts through the method of mass mobolisation can the unification of Ireland be achieved.

I would highly reccomend watching this-
Former H-Block hunger strike and IWU organiser Tommy McKearney speaks at éirígí's James Connolly commemoration in Arbour Hill, Dublin, 10 May 2008.

Great speech by a great Republican and Marxist.

éirígí are the most progressive Republican/Socialist party in Ireland.

That's why I joined. :D

[Pogue]

Obviously socialism is best, but I want socialism everywhere. It's like me answering someone when asked how to solve the Israel-Palestine conflict with "They should become socialist". It's clearly more complicated than that, and just saying become socialist is not an immediate solution, it's an idealistic one.

[bolshevik butcher]

What has proved to be entirely ineffective is the so called peace making and negotiating, basically the petty bourgoirse nationalist leadership of both Fatah and Sinn Fein recognising that the armed struggle had failed and setteling for their own piece of the pie offered to them by the imperialists.

None of the problems that cause the sectarian divide in Ireland have been solved, sectarianism is now ingrained inside the political system in the North and sectarian simmers on with murders every year. Just now it may not be as bad as it was but the potential for it to flare up only grows as the economic crisis worsens and poverty becomes more and more widespread and unbearable. Outside of the building of a mass socialist alternative that rejects the sectarianism implanted in Ireland by British imperialism and calls for a united socialist republic what do you suggest in Ireland?

[Pogue]

All is said is that dialogue is preferable to violence, and seeing as the violence ended recently, dialogue is now neccesary to resolve disputes. And what else should I advocate? No more violence, a socialist movement. Thats all.

[bolshevik butcher]

You are speaking in complete abstract and ignoring the material conditions at hand. Generally speaking you would be right in saying that of course dialogue is preferable to violence but what does that mean in real terms.

Reality is that the so called dialogue of the Good Friday Agreement was indeed a surrender by the Provisionsals and a recognition that the armed struggle had failed. It was not negotiation of equals it was an admission of defeat. Yet the solution is hardly nonviolent at all, sectarianism is engrained in the state, the implimentiaon of privatisation and job losses by the Stormont administation is another form of violence meated out against working class people.

In terms of struggle the working class employs its own methods based on the only power the working class has, that is its labour and its numbers. It is only through mass mobolisation that the working class can improvie its wellfare and position in society. This does not in itself imply pacifism but a rejection of sectarianism and a stamping out of bigitory. There is the example of the rising in Derry in 1969 and of course also the example of the Wolf shipyard in Belfast wher the workers, both catholic and proteastant formed a workers patrolthat stood for the protection of the workforce against sectairanism in the face of the RUC, paramiltarites and of course their employers.

[Pogue]

But now we're just arguing basics that capitalist state = violence (which it does). All I said is that theres no room for armed struggle in Ireland anymore.

[Hessian Peel]

But now we're just arguing basics that capitalist state = violence (which it does). All I said is that theres no room for armed struggle in Ireland anymore.

That's not the same thing as supporting the GFA/SAA though.

[Pogue]

All I ever said is I think the time for violence is over and the time for dialogue now. It's the people arguing against me who seem to fetishising violence. You're all reading into what I'm saying too much.
But if opposing violence makes me 'reformist', then I'm reformist.

[Sugar Hill Kevis]

Moved to politricks

[Hessian Peel]

But if opposing violence makes me 'reformist', then I'm reformist.

It doesn't, but supporting the GFA/SAA does.

[Saorsa]

But now we're just arguing basics that capitalist state = violence (which it does).

But remember people, many of the people actually carrying out the capitalist state's violence are "good", so we shouldn't condemn them as enemies.

Cool to hear that you're in eirigi Hessian, I was actually about to ask what people thought of them. Did you have anything to do with the action against Bush's visit, with the Iraqi flag and all?