💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › politics › SPUNK › sp001107.txt captured on 2022-03-01 at 16:47:24.
View Raw
More Information
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
4 articles
2nd is The IRA and its armed struggle; A Bloody Long War [WS35]
3rd is 'Should we get rid of articles 2 & 3 [WS38]
4th is Peace 93' [WS39]
********* Collaboration & Imperialism ************
from Workers Solidarity No 34
[1990]
THE KILLING of the seven building workers in
January marks the most bloody episode in an IRA
campaign against those who work for the 'security
forces', a campaign which has been going on since
1985. There has been a massive wave of
condemnation from bishops, politicians and media
figures.
Most of it is hypocritical cant. In all wars people who assist
or work for the enemy are targetted. During the War of
Independence the 'old IRA' shot people it suspected of
collaboration. Today it is a criminal offence to collaborate
with the IRA. Anyone allowing them to use their house or
car, anyone minding weapons or giving information can be
sentenced to long terms in jail. In the North their name may
be leaked to a loyalist death squad.
The Workers Solidarity Movement, as an anarchist and anti-
imperialist organisation, agrees with the Provos that workers
should not collaborate with the forces of imperialism. It is not
in the interest of any worker to collaborate with imperialism,
in Ireland or anywhere else.
This does not mean we agree with killing buiding workers.
We don't. The IRA threats to workers who service or deliver
to Army bases and RUC & UDR barracks tell us much about
the Provos. For all their left-wing slogans, they remain an
authoritarian nationalist movement. They decide what is
good for us, they decide what methods to use. The role of
everyone else is to passively cheer them on and preserve some
sort of nationalist solidarity.
A genuinely socialist and revolutionary movement would have
appealed to workers to black these bases because it is in their
own interest to fight imperialism. It is undeniable that such
an appeal would have been ignored by most. However in
areas such as Newry, Derry and Strabane there was a very
good chance that it would have been heeded if worked for. A
campaign of this sort would consist of raising the issue within
the unions, holding meetings at depot gates, producing
leaflets, taking up the arguments and fighting for official
union backing for anyone disciplined or sacked for refusing to
help the state's war effort.
It would be a start in bringing workers - as workers - to the
head of the anti-imperialist struggle. It has been done before.
At the time of the War of Independence there was an anti-
conscription strike, the "Limerick Soviet", the refusal of train
drivers to carry British troops or war materials.
Activity like this can give workers a sense of the potential
power they possess. And by being based on the methods of
mass struggle it can give workers the confidence to start
getting involved in political activity themselves intead of
leaving it to a few rulers and would-be rulers. This is very
important if we are to build a real socialist society where
there is no division into rulers and ruled.
We must also look at the objective result of the threats and
killings. It does not matter a lot what the intentions of the
Provos are, the fact is that killing labourers and other
workers drives Protestants of our class further into the arms
of bigots like Paisley. It is not enough to denounce such
workers as supporters of imperialism - the question is how to
win them away from that. Death threats certainly cannot do
it. Whether we like it or not many Protestants believe that
such workers are shot because they are Protestants and that
the Provos' stated reasons are not the real ones. Therefore
we call for the threats to be lifted and replaced by a workplace
campaign based on arguments about working class self-
interest.
- ********* The IRA and its armed struggle ***********
A Bloody Long War
from Workers Solidarity No 35
(1992)
Gerry Adams is no longer an MP. The
politicians and media pundits are over the
moon with joy. In their eyes the
republicans have been denied the
international 'credibility' of having an
elected MP and denied their 'mandate for
violence' at home.
In the immediate aftermath we were subjected to a barrage
of questions and comments about how this will effect the
respective strengths of the 'hawks' and 'doves' in the IRA.
Will there be an escalation of the armed struggle? Will
they hit back with ferocity? Will they decide that the
armed struggle is an impediment to their political
progress? Will there be a ceasefire?
Much of what was said was unadulterated rubbish. Gerry
Adams and Sinn F?in held their vote in West Belfast. The
SDLP did not eat into it. Adams 16,826 was only 36 down on
the 1987 result and was 447 up on the original 1983 poll.
The SDLP did not eat into it. What lost him the seat were
the 3,000 loyalists who heeded the UDA's call vote SDLP in
order to deny the seat to Adams. The Shankill's walls were
covered with "A vote for Cobain is a vote for Sinn F?in"
refering to the fact that if loyalists continued to vote
for the Unionist, Sinn F?in would hold the seat. This was
certainly not a pro-SDLP vote, it was explicitly an anti-
Sinn F?in one. Supporters of the UDA/UFF hate the SDLP,
it's just that they hate Sinn F?in a lot more.
Across the six counties, as a whole, Sinn F?in's vote did
drop... but only from 11% to 10%. They aren't going
anywhere, but they are not about to disappear either.
However it is true that a tentative debate has been going
on inside the IRA and Sinn F?in over the last two or three
years about the relative values of the armed struggle and
parliamentary politics.
In February Gerry Adams told the 'Irish Times' 'Two or
three years ago, I would have seen it necessary to
personally state publicly that yes, there was the right of
the IRA to engage in armed struggle, and perhaps even at
times that armed struggle was a necessary ingredient in the
struggle. I don't feel the need to do that now. In fact,
I think that my role now, and I've seen this increasingly
over the last 18 months, is one of increasingly and
persistently saying there's a need to end all acts of
violence." This is interesting, not so much for what is
being said, but for the fact that this shows a slightly
more open attitude towards politics. It used to be that
anyone questioning the value of the military campaign was
shown the door pretty quickly.
However it is not this debate that the establishment
politicians want to to take part in. Some of them almost
foam at the mouth when someone mentions republicans. They
have nothing but hatred for the Provos. North and South,
all the main parties have done their best to repress
republicanism. In the North it is shoot-to-kill
assassinations, beatings in RUC stations, censorship. In
the South it's extradition and more censorship. To be
thought a sympathiser of Sinn F?in is to invite Special
Branch attention and maybe a beating in a Garda station.
According to Fianna F?il, Fine Gael, Labour, Official
Unionist, DUP and all the rest this is justified by the
need to oppose violence. What a neck! The people who
supported the Gulf War (and those who allowed the use of
Shannon airport to US bombers) are telling us about the
need to oppose violence! What was the slaughter of
retreating Iraqi soldiers and civilians on the road from
Kuwait to Basra if it was not an act of violence, of
terrorism? The death toll in that terrible few hours when
the Americans gleefully labelled it a "turkey shoot" was
far more than all the deaths ever caused by the IRA... and
far more than the IRA is ever likely to cause.
The hypocrisy is evident. However the question remains:
should we call on the IRA to stop their campaign? To put
the question in such a way implies that the IRA are the
main problem, if only they would lay down their arms
everything would be o.k. We have to remember that the IRA
didn't start the 'troubles'. After the dismal failure of
their 1956-62 border campaign the guns were dumped. A new
force appeared, the Civil Rights Movement. Most of them
believed that peaceful reform within the six county state
was possible.
When they took to the streets loyalist gangs (including
politicians, policemen and the notorious B Specials)
attacked them. Streets were burned out, a pogrom began.
Since the founding of the six county state every time the
Catholic working class rose from their knees (or more
frightening for the bosses, every time Catholic and
Protestant workers united) sectarianism was whipped up and
a state-led pogrom was unleashed. The 'liberal' 1960's
were no exception.
The British Army were sent back in. At first they claimed
to be a 'disinterested' force standing between angry
Catholics and the Paisleyites and policemen who wanted to
invade Catholic areas and inflict a reign of terror.
Within a year it was clear to all that their real purpose
was to protect the Northern state and this would be done by
keeping down the Catholics. The Falls Road was placed
under a three day curfew in 1970 and three people shot dead
for venturing out of their homes. The IRA began to
reappear.
The next year saw internment without trial and the year
after that the murder of 14 Civil Rights marchers by
British troops on Bloody Sunday. The IRA grew in size and
escalated its recently commenced campaign. It was clear to
many young Catholics that the struggle for change had
become a struggle against the state itself and the British
Army that was protecting it.
Far from being the problem, the IRA is a product of it.
If the IRA declared a ceasefire the problem would remain.
If they completely vanished the problem would still be
glaringly obvious. And as long as that problem is there
there will be a response. Until imperialism is defeated
and sectarianism uprooted there will be resistance.
The question to be asked is what sort of resistance do we
need? The armed struggle of the IRA has no chance of
achieving victory. A small minority (the IRA) based within
a minority (Northern Catholics) cannot defeat the state.
They are unable to break out of the confines of the
Northern Catholic ghettoes. Southern Irish workers are not
influenced by claims that British imperialism is the main
enemy, North and South. Southern capitalism is no longer
tied to the apron strings of London. Workers in the 26
counties find themselves struggling against Irish and
multinational bosses.
IRA bombings and shootings are a thorn in the side of the
ruling class, an unpleasant pain but nothing likely to
prove fatal. Neither side can win a military victory.
There is no way that a small guerrilla army can defeat the
combined might of the RUC, UDR and British Army. Equally,
there is no way that the state forces can wipe out militant
republicanism. As long as partition, with its resultant
sectarianism and repression, has existed there have been
those who will take up arms against it.
While this continues there will be civilian casualties and
increased communalism and sectarian tension. Anarchists
oppose the republican armed struggle, it is not the way to
mobilise thousands upon thousands of working class people
against imperialism. It is not the way towards an anti-
sectarian working class unity.
The armed struggle is not something that republicans took
up because they have a fascination with violence or some
innate love of armalite rifles, despite what some media
commentators would have us believe. IRA volunteers are
brave men and women who want to hit back at the forces that
have been sticking the boot into their community. They
risk jailing, torture and death. If bravery was enough the
British Army would have been defeated years ago. Clearly
bravery is not enough.
To criticise the republicans' methods is not sufficient,
the methods flow from their politics. Nationalism sees the
main struggle as one between the 'Irish people' and British
imperialism. The class struggle within Ireland takes a
secondary place until the border is smashed. The mass of
ordinary people are kept passive. While a few hundred
courageous volunteers take up arms, the role of everyone
else doesn't add up to much more than joining the
occasional march or casting a vote for Sinn F?in. The few
fight and the rest stay at home and watch it on TV.
Republicans see the working class only as victims of the
system and not as people with the potential power to
overthrow it. The bravery of the few becomes a substitute
for mass action. The IRA campaign becomes central.
We do not like the romanticisation of violence. We do
enjoy seeing fathers bury their sons. We do not like part
of our country being a war zone. But it is not for these
reasons that we oppose the armed struggle. We are not
pacifists. At times it is necessary to use violence to
defend gains won in struggle. However we reject the idea
that a small grouping, with guns and bombs, can set us all
free.
Only masses of people involved in struggle can
fundamentally change society. We have to want to be free.
Nobody can force freedom down our throats. Armed struggle
is a substitute (and a poor substitute at that) for mass
action. When was the ruling class most worried by events
in the last two decades? It was the big Civil Rights
marches and the no-go areas of Free Derry and Free Belfast
that set their teeth chattering. It was the huge protests
after the Bloody Sunday murders that saw the British
Embassy burnt in Dublin and Jack Lynch's government
declaring a national day of mourning after workers had made
it clear there was going to be a total closedown of
industry.
It was this sort of militant mass action that forced
concessions from the British government. The B Specials
were disbanded, Unionist powers in local government were
limited. In 1972, after the Bloody Sunday protests, the
Stormont government was abolished. Of course many of these
concessions were clawed back when the mass movement was
eclipsed by the emergence of the IRA campaign and its
promise that 1973 (and '74 and '75!) would be the "year of
victory". The best example was the replacement of the B
Specials by the UDR. But the lesson remains, it was mass
action that won the concessions.
So if the Workers Solidarity Movement are so opposed to the
armed struggle why don't we join the call for a ceasefire.
We won't line up with the right wing politicians and their
'Peace Train' supporters who seek to apportion all the
blame to the IRA for the 'troubles'. The IRA are a
response to a problem. The primary problem is partition,
sectarianism and the occupation by the British Army. We
refuse to join in the scapegoating of republicans.
Equally, we refuse to mute our criticism of republicanism
and its armed struggle. We are opposed to their politics
as well as their methods. We stand for anarchism, for an
independent working class position. We want to break
working class people from the gombeen nationalism of Fianna
F?il, from the reactionary hatemongering of loyalism, from
the sub-reformism of Labour and Democratic Left, ...and
from the communalism of Sinn F?in.
While opposing the presence of the British Army and the
continuing partition of the country, the working class must
also fight the Southern state. We have to oppose
imperialism and, at the same time, oppose the clerical
nationalist laws in the South which ban divorce and
abortion. We have to oppose Orange bigotry while at the
same time campaigning for the complete separation of Church
and State.
We do not fight for a united capitalist Ireland, neither as
a 'step in the right direction' or as an end in itself.
Joining the six to the twenty six counties offers nothing
to working class people in either state. We have no
interest in re-dividing poverty on a more 'equitable'
basis. The only Ireland worth fighting for is a Workers
Republic where every working class person stands to gain.
The way towards such a new Ireland is the way of class
struggle and mass action, taking control of our own
struggles and doing it in our own class interests. This is
the road to freedom.
Joe King
- ********* Should we get rid of articles 2 & 3 ********
from WS 38
[1993?]
Article 2: The National territory consists of the whole
island of Ireland, its' islands and its' territorial seas.
Article 3: Pending the re-integration of the national
territory and without prejudice to the right of Parliament
and Government established by this constitution to exercise
jurisdiction over the whole of that territory, the laws
enacted by Parliament shall have the like area and extent
of application as the laws of Saorstat Eireann [26
counties] and the like extra-territorial effect.
Mention the conflict in the North and many people
will turn off. Not because they do not care about
what is going on but because they do not feel that
they can make any difference. Who wants to hear
about another death or another bombing? Most
people in Ireland were glad to see the release of
the Birmingham 6 and the Guildford 4, but in Dublin
last Summer only 300 marched against the
extradition of Angelo Fusco. The answer to the
problem is made out to lie with the British and
Irish governments in collaboration with the
Unionist leaders. Workers in the South do not see
themselves as having a part to play in the
solution.
It is in this atmosphere of alienation that talks, and
talks about talks, can be portrayed as having an impact.
In fact they were just talks. The latest set wound up last
November with nothing decided. The banning of the UDA can
be portrayed as positive action against the loyalist death
squads. Even though they still exist, and are now killing
more people than the Provos. And this while it has come
out that Brian Nelson, a British mole actually took part in
over sixteen murders with official permission.
The Unionists are able to claim that it is the Republic of
Ireland's 'claim' to the North in Articles 2 and 3 that is
the cause of the 'troubles'. Meanwhile the British State
is getting away with occupying the place and few people see
this as a problem.
In an upcoming referendum anarchists will oppose the
deletion of Article 2. We do so, not because we support
the 26 county state over the 6 county one, but because we
are opposed to the partition of Ireland. The Article
recognises the partition of Ireland and we want to see a
united Ireland. For this we will oppose its deletion.
We, however, won't get too excited about Article 3. To
support the claim of the Dublin government is to support
the authority of one set of bosses over another. We, who
want to get rid of the division into bosses and bossed,
won't do this.
WHY IRELAND WAS DIVIDED
Ireland was partitioned because of the conflicting economic
interests between capitalists in the North-East and those
in the rest of Ireland. Generally speaking the South was
less developed and wanted independence to defend its infant
economy from cheap British imports.
The North-East was already relatively well developed with
thriving linen and shipbuilding industries, both of which
depended on Britain for export markets. The partition of
Ireland and the creation of the six county state was a
compromise between these conflicting interests.
In order to win support for partition the bosses in the
North-East stirred up sectarian hatred against Catholics.
They made sure there was a material basis for such hatred.
Slightly better housing and jobs were given to Protestants
over Catholics. It was made clear that these privileges
would go if Protestant workers supported Irish
independence.
On this basis the sectarian statelet of the six counties
was founded. It was built with Protestant working class
support on the grounds that they would remain better off
than Catholics. These conditions have existed right up to
the present day. Protestant workers may be more likely to
be unemployed and on lower wages than a worker in London or
Manchester. But they know that they are still only half as
likely to be unemployed as a Catholic living in the next
housing estate.
The loyalist terror groups have their recruiting grounds in
Unionist working class areas. They feed off the fear that
Protestants will loose their slight privileges over the
Catholics. They encourage sectarian hatred by saying that
Catholics are the main enemy of the Protestants. That is
why Loyalists such as the Ulster Defence Association will
target any Catholics. They have been tricked into
believing that it is Catholics that are the main enemy and
they are all 'legitimate targets'.
In reality the main enemy for both Catholic and Protestant
workers is the ruling class. They are the people who set
wages, hire and fire, and seek to control peoples' lives in
all areas. For socialists, the most important task is to
unite Catholic and Protestant workers and convince them to
fight together against the bosses.
This has happened before, for example the Outdoor Relief
Strike in 1932 when Catholics from the Falls Road and
Protestants from the Shankill Road of Belfast fought
together for better conditions for the unemployed. And
more recently in the health service strikes and DSS strikes
against sectarian intimidation throughout the 1980s.
Partition is not only bad because of the way that Northern
nationalists are treated. It also has an effect in the
South. As Connolly predicted partition led to "a carnival
of reaction, North and South".
For most of the history of the state, politics in the South
has been dominated by Fianna F?il and Fine Gael. There is
hardly a political difference between the two. The
influence of the conservative Catholic Church has until
recently determined social legislation. In the South the
carnival is winding down, but in the North it is still
going at full belt.
It is because of this that anarchists are opposed to the
deletion of Article 2. A socialist perspective needs to be
heard. The question of partition, and sectarian state must
be dealt with properly by socialists or it will not be
solved.
NATIONALISTS
Anarchists do not support the nationalist point of view.
This will be put forward by Sinn F?in, the Irish National
Congress, Neil Blaney and such like. They will be fighting
for a united capitalist Ireland. Socialists will not get
much chance to be heard. We will be told that, yet again,
'labour must wait'.
We are not struggling for a united capitalist Ireland. In
any campaign we will be putting forward the socialist
perspective that we are against partition because it fans
the flames of sectarianism. In its place we want a
socialist 32 county Republic uniting both Protestant and
Catholic workers.
Unfortunately at the moment anarchists cannot set the
political agenda. Our influence is far too small. Most of
the time we have to react to events as they occur. We
helped to win the referenda on travel and information last
year but we recognise that the main event that triggered
the referenda was government action. They injuncted the 14
year old girl and caused the "X" case. It was people's
reaction to this issue that forced the changes in the
constitution.
Likewise with a referendum to change Articles 2 and 3.
While we would prefer to be involved in widespread united
strike action of Protestants and Catholics, arguing for
socialism, we cannot do so at the moment. If there is to
be a referendum we will use it as an opportunity to argue a
socialist perspective. This is an opportunity to argue a
socialist answer and it should not be missed.
??
Andrew Blackmore
********** Peace '93 ********
from Workers Solidarity No39
[1993]
DUBLIN SUNDAY MARCH 28TH. On a rainy
afternoon about 20,000 people (Irish Times
estimate) crowd O'Connell Street to protest
at the deaths of two children, Jonathan
Ball and Tim Parry. At the fringes of the
rally a small group carry pictures of some
other victims of violence. Fergal
Carahers's widow holds a placard saying
"also, remember, British soldiers killed my
husband". Others hold pictures of Majela
O'Hare, Aiden McAnespie, Seamus Duffy,
Karen Reilly and other victims of security
force violence in the North.
A small section of the crowd reacts angrily and
begins to heckle them shouting "out, out, out!".
Gardai move in quickly to grab the offending
placards. In death as in life it seems that some
are more equal then others.
The Peace 1993 movement was set-up after the
Warrington bombings as people reacted angrily to
the killing of innocent children. Their efforts
to distance themselves from politics have not
been entirely successful. Attempting to mould
the peace movement in their own image were New
Consensus and the Peace Train Organisation.
These organisations are little more then fronts
for the Democratic Left, Workers Party and others
who see the IRA as the incarnation of all evil.
They are partly financed by the British
government, through the Northern Ireland Office
(see 'Peace train runs out of steam' Workers
Solidarity 33). The people involved in Peace
1993 events have the best of motives and are
sickened by the violence on all sides.
Unfortunately they are been used.
GANGSTERS AND PSYCHOPATHS?
Peace 1993 has started with the analysis we are
offered again and again by our rulers and the
media. Paramilitaries, especially republican
ones, are portrayed as gangsters and psychopaths
used and manipulated by cynical "godfather's of
crime". It is because of the IRA (we are told)
that "normal democratic politics" cannot proceed.
If they were to lay down their arms everything
would be Hunky-Dory. Unfortunately this is not
the case. Indeed the ceasefire of 1975 between
the British government and the IRA was broken
unilaterally by the British. They used the
opportunity to conduct raids and searches for
arms, and provoked the republicans in every way
possible. The ceasefire was not signed by the
loyalist gunmen who stepped up their sectarian
campaign.
Sinn F?in's electoral support is 10% in total and
30% among Northern Ireland Catholics,
concentrated in the working class areas of West
Belfast and Derry and among small farmers in the
border counties. The IRA have no difficulty in
recruiting young Catholic workers and unemployed
and will continue to do so. They are not the
problem, they are a product of the real problem.
This is the Northern Ireland State. There can be
no "normal politics" in Northern Ireland. This
is a State founded on blatant sectarianism and
the repression of the minority. Catholics are
still twice as likely to be unemployed as their
Protestant neighbours (according to the
government's own Fair Employment Agency). This
is combined with day-to-day harassment by the
security forces and the recent acceleration of
sectarian attacks. These are the conditions that
make it very unlikely that the IRA will just
disappear.
POLITICS OR POND LIFE?
The IRA are a response to a State that was a
model in sectarianism. The British State
succeeded in buying off Protestant workers with
marginal privileges. They created the
reactionary ideology of unionism. Normal
politics in Northern Ireland is illustrated
graphically by the activities of the Belfast city
council which recently took another giant step
into the dark ages when it renewed it's ban on
over 18s films on Sundays. The normal politics
of this council chamber was described as "more
like pond-life then politics" by one recently
resigned SDLP councillor.
As long as the British occupation continues and
as long as unionism is propped up by them, so-
called normal politics in Northern Ireland
remains in the realm of sick humour. The IRA are
not to blame for the situation in the North. But
they will never be able to change it.
The armed struggle over the last 20 or so years
has done little more then irritate the British
and Irish governments. A small guerrilla army
will never defeat the combined resources of the
British and Southern Irish States. Like all
small guerilla armies they are elitist and
unanswerable to those they claim to represent.
The only role they offer Catholic workers is to
cheer on from the sidelines.
No group of this nature no matter, how brave or
well armed, will ever set us free. Ultimately
the armed struggle is no substitute for mass
action. The only way to fundamentally change
things is by uniting workers North and South of
all religions and none to defeat the bosses,
orange and green, and build a secular worker's
republic.
WINNING SUPPORT ...FOR MORE REPRESSION?
The so-called economic bombing campaign in
Britain is another reflection of the IRA's
political bankruptcy. Any serious socialist
anti-imperialist group would attempt to enlist
the support of British workers against their own
ruling class. The IRA's simplistic strategy is
that they can bomb them into submission by
causing massive economic damage. In fact it
alienates British workers and makes the
introduction of anti-Irish laws like The
Prevention of Terrorism Act that bit easier.
And it has to be said that the IRA know well that
the authorities will occasionally ignore or delay
a bomb warning in order to whip up anger at the
Provos. With this knowledge it has to be said
that the IRA take a very cavalier attitude
towards the lives of ordinary people every time
they plant a bomb in a shopping mall or railway
station. It would not be unreasonable to ask if
their bombing of Warrington amounts to
manslaughter.
The economic bombing campaign of the last 20
years from the Birmingham pub bombs, through the
attacks on Downing Street, the stock exchange and
the recent massive attack on the Nat West tower
have not shaken the British government's resolve.
Despite the cost (the Damage from the Nat West
bomb is estimated at ?3-500 million or about 1/10
of the annual bill for running the North for a
year) they still hang on.
MORE PROGRESSIVE THAN THE LEGION OF MARY!
Anyone waiting eagerly to hear radical ideas from
the IRA's political wing, Sinn F?in after the
slight relaxation of Section 31 (of the
Broadcasting Act) forced on RTE can stop holding
their breath. Take womens' rights for example.
At this year's Ard Fheis a motion was put forward
committing them to support a woman's right to
choose abortion. One delegate (Daisy Mules from
Derry) in support of the motion said that "the
struggle for human rights and democracy must
include womens' rights which includes the right
to choose".
The party's ruling Ard Chomhairle had different
ideas. Tom Hartley claimed that existing policy
was "the most progressive held by any political
party in the country" (Not true, of course, both
Democratic Left and the Worker's Party have gone
further in their limited support for abortion
rights). Gerry Adams claimed that to change
policy "would be the biggest mistake we could
make this weekend". The motion was defeated (An
Phoblacht/Republican News 25th February).
Sinn F?in's politics continue to be based around
a desperate attempt to make friends with right
wing nationalist elements like Fianna F?il TD
Michael Noonan and the SDLP 'grassroots'. This
strategy has failed totally and their vote in the
South remains minute.
The truth is that neither Peace 1993 nor the
republicans can change things. Their simplistic
solutions of "Lets all put down our guns and be
pals" (unless we happen to have uniforms) or that
of a united capitalist Ireland underline the lack
of ideas of both organisations. Not only have
they no solutions they haven't even begun to ask
the right questions.
WORKERS' ACTION
Our solution is not quite so simple. It is a
longer and more difficult route, but it is the
only one which will work. It involves uniting
workers in Ireland to fight for a united
anarchist republic.
In the short-term this means supporting and
building, where possible, united action against
the bosses. Also where united struggles do take
place trying to make connections showing how the
only way to real unity against the bosses is to
oppose partition which is used to keep Protestant
and Catholic workers apart. In the long-term it
means fighting both British imperialist
occupation of Northern Ireland and our own native
bosses and Southern clericalist laws. The only
way to do this is through massive united class
struggle. There are no short-cuts on the road to
freedom.
Des McCarron