Review: IRSP Ard-Fheis '02
national |
miscellaneous |
news report
Thursday November 07, 2002 02:47
by Danielle Ni Dhighe - Irish Republican Socialist Movement
danielle at irsm dot org
A review of the IRSP's recent Ard-Fheis.
Review: IRSP Ard-Fheis '02
By John Martin, IRSP Political Secretary
The 4th Ard-Fheis since the reformation of the Irish Republican
Socialist Party in 1995 was held recently in Derry City.
A lively and critical debate took place over a wide range of issues
and 24 resolutions were passed with a number of motions referred to
the incoming Ard-Chomhairle. Aims and principles of the movement are
contained in the document "This is Republican Socialism", published
on page 7 of this publication.
This was an important development in the evolution of the party since
Gino Gallagher initiated the revival of the Republican Socialist
Movement in late 1994. A decision was then taken by the leading
activists of the movement to not only expand the IRSP with new
members, but actively seek the return of former activists. As one
comrade said, "We have drawn a line under the past and we are taking
a mature approach - the door is open to anyone who agrees with
republican socialist politics."
Unfortunately an armed assault on the movement by a gang lead by
former INLA leader Hugh Torney and using known drug dealers led to
the death of Gino Gallagher and set back by a number of years the
rebuilding of the movement.
However, since then, there have been 4 Ard-Fheiseanna held which have
pointed the way forward for the movement and shown what can be
achieved by political action.
The below resolution probably summarises what most activist
republicans believe despite what the Provisional Sinn Fein leadership
says.
"Ard-Fheis recognises that the Good Friday Agreement has failed to
deliver peace to working class communities, has increased sectarian
division and is a major block towards a Republic. We call for all
republicans and socialists to oppose the current political set-up,
unite in opposition to the maintenance of a sectarian state and push
for-ward towards a republic. We believe that political opposition is
the best method available at this time to republican and socialist
forces and that these forces could best be united in a Republican
Forum that allows for unity in action whilst respecting ideological
differences."
A lively discussion took place around the Non-Aggression Pact,
with many delegates opposed to any talks with representatives of
sectarian loyalism. A commitment was given by the party leadership
not to enter into talks with the UDA without calling a special Ard-
Fheis. There is unlikely to be such an Ard-Fheis in the foreseeable
future. However the delegates endorsed the NAP by a huge majority.
Another resolution applauded and supported the disciplined and
defensive role of the INLA in the defence of working class
communities, especially in North Belfast, from sectarian attack and
re-affirmed support for the INLA ceasefire.
On policing the position was clear - opposition to republicans ever
taking seats on the Northern Ireland Policing Board.
An important document, "On Organising Our Work in the Trade Unions",
was presented to the Ard-Fheis and showed the determination of the
party to turn towards the working class and its organised sections in
particular. This document will be thoroughly discussed and debated by
the movement before the next Ard-Fheis.
A comprehensive resolution on anti-drug work was also passed with an
emphasis on adequate preventative measures necessary in combating the
drug epidemic that has devastated working class communities.
Solidarity was expressed with Traveller organisations, who are
opposed to "The Housing Miscellaneous Act (2002)", a draconian piece
of legislation, which criminalises Travellers for being Travellers.
There was also condemnation of the world's drug companies and
western governments for their refusal to reduce the cost of drugs and
treatment for HIV/AIDS. These should be made freely available to help
ease the suffering of those millions who suffer from the escalating
HIV/AIDS crisis in the Third World.
On housing, the Ard Fheis supported the demands for affordable social
housing to be made available for all regardless of race, colour or
creed and condemned the political scapegoating of ethnic and racial
minorities.
Support for Dessie O'Hare was also expressed and his immediate
release as a qualifying political prisoner under the Good Friday
Agreement was demanded.
Support for political prisoners in Ireland and internationally was
also expressed, with particular sympathy for the Palestinians
and in particular our comrades in the PFLP.
Also the Ard-Fheis sent solidarity greetings to those courageous
death fasters in Turkey who are struggling against an oppressive
prison regime.
The Ard-Fheis ended with the Republican Socialist Movement in the
strongest position it has been in since its foundation.
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (31 of 31)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31This is Republican Socialism!
The Irish Republican Socialist Party is an organisation created by
and for working class people, to aid working class liberation in
Ireland and internationally with others who share that common goal.
The IRSP stands in the tradition of James Connolly, seeking an end to
all forms of exploitation and the creation of a 32-county socialist
republic, with the working class collectively owning the means of
production, distribution, and exchange, as well as democratically
administering society.
Socialism
The socialism we embrace is the kind that liberates, not enslaves. We
strive towards a society that functions to meet human needs, not the
need for profit. Our socialism is a means of liberating our class
from all forms of oppression, whether economic, political, religious,
cultural or social. It is a socialism that envisions our class
controlling their own destinies and that of the nation as a whole.
National Liberation
The struggle for national liberation cannot be separated from the
class struggle. Any attempt to isolate one from the other will result
in failure. It is meaningless to speak of a free nation, if the
overwhelming majority remain oppressed, and national sovereignty is
lost through multinational corporate control of the economy just as
much as by partition. At the same time, someone who refuses to
challenge British imperialism in Ireland cannot claim to be fighting
for socialism and the continuation of partition props up the
divisions in the working class of Ireland that hold us back from our
own liberation. We have no choice in whether or not we wish to
consider the interconnection of the national and class questions,
reality forces us to do so.
We define the national liberation struggle as that struggle which
seeks:
*1-to force a British military withdrawal from the occupied Six
Counties.
*2-the destruction of the pro-British loyalist armed forces.
*3-the withdrawal of British political influence from all parts of
Ireland.
*4-the ending the partition of the island of Ireland and the
overturning of both the partitionist governments presently
administering political affairs of Ireland.
*5-the gaining of collective economic control of the nation's
resources by the nation as a whole and the eradication of any control
or influence exercised by foreign capitalists over any aspect of the
Irish economy.
*6-the recognition of a separate Irish cultural identity.
*7-the establishment of revolutionary 32-county socialist republic.
We aim to build a strong alliance in Irish society of our class in
towns and cities, agricultural workers in the country-side,
unemployed workers, working class refugees, linked as a movement
internationally with other like-minded liberation struggles.
We firmly stand-by the struggle for a republic. On that we are
inflexible, but our struggle for the republic is a means to an end.
For us, the national liberation struggle is but an aspect of the
struggle for socialism.
Loyalism & Nationalism
We distinguish between loyalism and Protestantism. We recognise the
right of everyone to their own religious beliefs, provided they do
not use these beliefs to oppress others. We have no quarrel with
Protestant workers and welcome them to join us in struggle. However,
we stand totally opposed to the political ideology of loyalism.
Loyalism is a reactionary, sectarian and pro-imperialist ideology,
with which we can make no compromise. We recognise that nationalism
in the context of the Irish struggle is progressive, but we also
recognise that nationalism can play a reactionary role. The national
chauvinism of the Tories, National Front, etc. is
counterrevolutionary and anathema to socialists. The nationalism of
an oppressed country is vastly different from such reactionary
jingoism. We support all struggles against imperialism throughout the
world.
Class Mobilisation
Only by mobilising our class north and south - Protestant, Catholic
and Dissenter - can the goal of national liberation and socialism be
achieved. Workers have distinct interests as a class, ultimately
opposed to any other class, we must join together as a class to win
control of society.
Equality
Our class faces daily, relentless assaults inflicted on us from many
quarters and a constant onslaught of attempts to divide us. The IRSP
oppose and fight against all forms of inequality and oppression,
including that of women, travellers, lesbians, gays, or other sexual
minorities, refugees, Africans, Asians, and any other oppressed
sector of the working class. We oppose racism, Zionism, sexism,
homophobia, national chauvinism, and anything else which divides our
class. We support reproductive rights and unhindered access to
contraception, including a woman's right to choose abortion. We are
opposed to religious sectarianism and seek the complete separation of
church and state and a secular society.
Our Earth
The increasing destruction of our environment is due to mismanagement
of industrialisation and the inevitable product of a system which
puts profit before all else, that is capitalism. The IRSP is
committed to sustainable and renewable energy sources, preservation
of the ecology and biodiversity of our planet, with protection of all
species and the promotion of a healthy environment for all people and
animal life.
Revolution Not Reform
The IRSP believe that the present class system cannot be reformed out
of existence. There exists no parliamentary road to socialism and the
liberation of our class. We need to build an organised working class
movement with the politics capable of leading the fight against
capitalism. Our class are entitled to control over all the wealth of
society and to obtain it through any means necessary.
From what you posted up I have a number of criticisms of the IRSP. I would be great if someone from the IRSP would answer my questions and criticisms.
1.
IRSP do not put forward the call for nationalisation of the key sectors of the economy. But you do put forward detailed demands on the 'national liberation'.
2. You want Ireland to be free from control of "foreign capitalists". But does that mean that Irish capitalists are alright.
3. The IRSP are very weak on internationalism. You give solidarity to the palestinians, only because they are also engaged in "national liberation", it's a selfish international solidarity. What about the workers of Israel? do you not supprt them? what about all workers around the world?
4. Support for the INLA. The IRSP do not realise that the tactic of terrorism is a failed tactic, it the tactic of desperation. If you are socialists why are you not calling for the Labour movement to defend workers from sectarianism? why are you not calling for mass action and not the action of a few self-appointed terrorists?
5. On one hand you call for class unity, then on the other you call for Irish "national liberation". You fail to see that Protestents will not support a socialist movement that puts forward demands for sectarian right-wing nationalistic "national liberation". You call for class unity on paper, but in reality you do not do a thing to build class unity.
"". You fail to see that Protestents will not support a socialist movement that puts forward demands for sectarian right-wing nationalistic "national liberation"
how is a call for national liberation right wing or sectarian?
"The British Socialist who fails to support by all positive means the uprising in Ireland, Egypt and India against the London PLutocracy - such a Socialist deserves to be branded with infamy, ifd not with a bullet, but in no case merits either a mandate or the confidence of the proletariat."
Leon Trotsky, 7 August 1920.
From the Report on the Manifesto of the Second World Congress of the Communist International.
Reprinted in "The Communists and the Irish Revolution." (LITERÉIRE, Dublin 1993) edited by D.R. O'Connor Lysaght.
I know Trotskys opinion won't cut much ice with many on indymedia but the above statement will cause some to perform mental gymnastics.
Indy media is becoming a forum where terrorist supporters just bash the "Brits". The IRSP are not a credible left wing party, the bloody history of the INLA is all they can claim.
Not boring at all, the below link to previous debate was the best I've seen yet on indy media.
http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=16761&start=30
[IRSP do not put forward the call for nationalisation of the key sectors of the economy.]
The object of the IRSM remains a 32-county socialist republic, wherein the Irish working class will control the means of production, distribution and exchange, administered by the proletariat through workers' democracy.
[You want Ireland to be free from control of "foreign capitalists". But does that mean that Irish capitalists are alright?]
I challenge you to show where the IRSP has ever supported capitalism, native or foreign.
[The IRSP do not realise that the tactic of terrorism is a failed tactic.]
"Armed struggle of 25 years has achieved the Good Friday Agreement. That may be an advance as some could argue, but was it worth it? Will any more big bangs bring us closer to our republican goals? We think not. In the new circumstances now prevailing republican socialists have to renew the struggle on the doorsteps of the people, in the housing estates, in the workplaces, in the factories, in the council chambers and in any elected chambers we succeed in entering." - John Martin, IRSP Political Secretary, 2000 Ard-Fheis
[Why are you not calling for mass action?]
"A socialist republic can only be established through the mass revolutionary action of the working class in the political, economic, and social spheres." - Motion passed at 2000 Ard-Fheis
[You fail to see that Protestents will not support a socialist movement that puts forward demands for sectarian right-wing nationalistic "national liberation".]
The Protestant members of the IRSP might disagree with such blanket statements.
What makes you think national liberation, i.e. liberating the nation from foreign control and the working class from capitalism, is right wing and nationalistic?
The ideological statement passed at the 2000 Ard-Fheis:
This Ard-Fheis affirms,
a) that the IRSP is a revolutionary Marxist organization, and that by this we mean that the IRSP believes:
b) Class conflict is the motive force in human history;
c) The IRSP stands unreservedly and exclusively for the interests of the working class against all others;
d) Only the creation of a 32-county Irish socialist republic can provide the means by which Irish national liberation can be realized;
e) That there can be no socialism without national liberation in Ireland, nor can there be national liberation without socialism;
f) That there is no parliamentary road to socialism, because socialism cannot be forged by seizing the bourgeois State apparatus; nor is there a guerilla road to socialism, because a social revolution requires the active participation of the masses; and therefore that a socialist republic can only be established through the mass revolutionary action of the working class in the political, economic, and social spheres;
g) That socialism means the ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange collectively by the entire working class, with an end to wage labour, an end to production for profit and its replacement by a system of production based on human need; and
h) That socialism must be administered democratically by the working class itself, recognising the class dictatorship of the workers, because the vast majority of society is formed by that class. This does not suggest the need for a political dictatorship of a single party. Rather it calls out for a class dictatorship, administered through new working class institutions created to permit the greatest degree of political freedom for all working people.
national liberation is not unsocialist in itself. I support the Irish peoples right to determine their own destiny.
However Irish Republicanism's idea of "national liberation" is about imposing their style of irishness on others. Its about having an Ireland of Catholic Gaelic speakers, all other forms of Irishness is not good enough.
You do not appeal to the mass of protestent people because you are firmly on the side of nationalist republicanism. Similarly the PUP did not appeal to the mass of catholics because they were firmly on the side of Unionism, not socialism.
". Its about having an Ireland of Catholic Gaelic speakers, all other forms of Irishness is not good enough"
who is looking for this? the irsp isn't.
sinn fein aren't. they may have some reactionary positions re compulsary irish though. but this may have been dropped.
perhaps a sf comrade could clarify.
"Its about having an Ireland of Catholic Gaelic speakers, all other forms of Irishness is not good enough."
That's never been a position of the IRSP.
This is madness. I'm not denying there are Catholics in SF, and some of them may be devout, but there are also Protestants and to my own knowledge at least one muslim together with a large array of atheists and humanists. Anyone who traces the history of Irish republicanism can see that one of its greatest and most fervrent opponenets has always been the Catholic Church. For the record I'm not a Catholic.
I also can't speak much Irish but do try to use the little I have on occasion. SF party policy is still to support compulsory Irish and to encourage investment in Irish language schools at secondary and national level. Personally I don't see it as reactionary as reclaiming one's language from a coloniser who tried to destroy it strikes me as a liberating thing. That said, I'd say the majority of the party aren;t fluent speakers though it is probably spoken more in SF than in any other party. I don't see anything wrong with that.
I suppose dealing drugs in working class catholic areas will bring that glorious day of a united republic .... i mean socialist republic, that bit closer.
National Liberation???
"We support all struggles against imperialism throughout the world. "
Does that mean you support the struggle of Osama Bin Ladin in his fight against US imperialism???
Your national liberation has an awful bang of Stalinist Two stageism and has as much in common with genuine Marxism as dealing drugs to working class youth. Don't even think of denying it, the truth is concrete fellow marxist
compulsory irish has been abolished to bring it back & try & force it down peoples throats would be aretrograde step.
since the inception of the "state" it was tried to beat irish into pupils, it didn't work.
how do you think it will now? if sf get into govt in the south are they going to insist that state services work thru the medium of irish?
they don't at the moment. are you going to take on & smash the unions who will resist such a move?
where will you get your army of strike breaking irish speakers to replace those who neither have irish nor have the desire to learn it?
this is a serious point justin. its easy to say you are in favour of something w/o thinking thru the consequences.
I suppose dealing drugs in working class catholic areas will bring that glorious day of a united republic .... i mean socialist republic, that bit closer.
National Liberation???
"We support all struggles against imperialism throughout the world. "
Does that mean you support the struggle of Osama Bin Ladin in his fight against US imperialism???
Your national liberation has an awful bang of Stalinist Two stageism and has as much in common with genuine Marxism as dealing drugs to working class youth. Don't even think of denying it, the truth is concrete fellow marxist
No serving member of the INLA has been arrested, charged, or convicted on drug offences. More than a few IRSP members are known anti-drug activists. Two senior members of the IRSP were invited to participate in a large anti-drug event sponsored by several community groups in Dublin just this summer.
I'd say it will have nothing to do with people like yourself who are serving the interests of the state.
>compulsory irish has been abolished to bring it back & try & force it down peoples throats would be a retrograde step.
Hmmmm, the key problem I have with that argument is its factual inaccuracy. Irish is still compulsory to primary and secondary level.
>since the inception of the "state" it was tried to beat irish into pupils, it didn't work.
Indeed it did not because it was taught in possibly the worst way possible, something Irish language activists have long accepted and pointed out.
>how do you think it will now? if sf get into govt in the south are they going to insist that state services work thru the medium of irish?
Sinn Féin supports a policy of bilingualisation in state business, that those who wish to deal with state services through both English and Irish be catered for. This happens to be state policy at the moment even if they adhere to it in scattered fashion.
>they don't at the moment. are you going to take on & smash the unions who will resist such a move?
where will you get your army of strike breaking irish speakers to replace those who neither have irish nor have the desire to learn it?
I think the point above deals with most of this. We believe and support the teaching and learning of Irish. We want a situation where both languages are catered for equally. We don’t believe, nor do we want, to eliminate English and speak only Irish. We support bilingualisation and if we did it a little more seriously than others, I think that’s a positive thing.
>this is a serious point justin. its easy to say you are in favour of something w/o thinking thru the consequences.
It’s also REALLY easy to make an argument and ask questions without checking your facts Pat ;)
"More than a few IRSP members are known anti-drug activists."
Your idea of 'anti-drugs activists' amount to thugs that beat up the local addict that hasnt paid up to the local INLA dealer.
Your whole solution is vigilantyism not mass action against drug dealers.
...you've obviously never met any of our members who do anti-drug work.
As the irsp believe that your allegations are a smear, why don't you give some specifics, like areas run by irsp drug dealers, narrow it down a bit more then dublin please.
otherwise you might as well be writing in middle abbey street
...you've obviously never met any of our members who do anti-drug work.
Yeah, he wouldn't be able to type if he had because they'd have cut his fingers off with a chisel and then broken every bone in his body.
The IRSP Ard Fheis was held in a bullet proof cardboard box behind the shell of the house at Free Derry Corner. Unfortunately it was no use since the shots were fired from INSIDE the cardboard box.
my facts were just that.
it is no longer necessary to pass in irish to get a leaving certificate.
it is no longer necessary to pass in irish in the civil service exams to get a job.
do you really want to back to a situation where people who fail irish & pass all other subjects are denied a certificate?
should doctors have to be capable of working thru irish before they can get a job?
in particular bringing back a compulsary irish requirement in the public service would discriminate against people from the p[rotestant community in the north. (few of whom have any interest in learning irish)
The answer to the overwhelming majority of your queries is simply no. We want a bilingual Ireland, not an Ireland where state service is barred to non-Irish speaker, or where people who don't speak Irish are treated as second class citizens or any of the other things you assumed for reasons unclear we wanted. I agree with your point about Loyalists being turned off Irish if the changes you suggested were our party policies were implemented, but not being our party policies I don't see the problem. On a side note, you used Protestants rather than Loyalists, many of the leading lights of the Irish language movements were Protestant and considering David Ervine is a near fluent Irish speaker perhaps Loyalist shouldn't be used either.
As for the comment on doctors, hospitals should do all they can to facilitate those who wish to speak Irish, especially those hospitals which operate in Irish speaking areas but we certainly realise, especially with the large number of doctors not native to Ireland, that this is not always possible.
For doctors in private business, what they do is up to them but the hope would be that if an interest in Irish can be facilitated across the State they would see the merits in this.
We're not going to get into power and go mad a bout irish. We realise that building a language up from near bottom is a project for generations, not years. But we believe it can be done and efforts should be made to bring it about.
there are INLA drug dealers and protectioin racketts in North Belfast. In the area where the Holy Cross school is. That is a fact.
not even the ruc/psni have alleged that the irsp are dealing in drugs.
I think they have once or twice in public but the important thing is what they do in private and privately the RUC has again and again told journalists the INLA is involved in drugs. Of course the reason the security forces do this is because their primary concern is to protect and inform working class nationalist communities whom they are dedicated to protect.
And on the note of INLA - IRSP and drugs I think a distinction can be drawn between the actions of members of the IRSM in one area and another.
Of course SF are well used to making distinctions between different sections of your party.
In the US when taking the money from the capitalists you are moderates and conservatives. When in the working class estates of Dublin you are revolutionaries!
When in Sligo you vote for the Bin Tax, when in Dublin you are against the bin tax!
When in Fermanagh you support the Hayes report, when in Omagh you oppose it! (Hayes report reccommends closure of Omagh hospital)
When you are in the Northern executive you privitise schools through PPP/PFI. When you are in the south you pretend to be opposed to privitisation.
I could go on all day, the fact is that SF is riddled with contradictions arising from the fact that you are a right wing sectarin party pretending to be radical and revolutionary to your working class support base.
by the revolution will have nothing to do with de irsp Thu, Nov 7 2002, 6:05pm
The writer above called bullox or whatever must be a trot if the statement below is anything to go by:
"Your national liberation has an awful bang of Stalinist Two stageism and has as much in common with genuine Marxism ...."
As if an awful bang of nutty notions such as 'permanent revolution' would be better in some way.
As for: "the revolution will have nothing to do with de irsp"
This is perhaps a little saner, but you should add the sp, the swp, red action and other trot sects to your list.
Whether the membership of the IRSP/INLA is dealing in drugs is the subject of claim and counter claim. However, there is one fact that the IRSP cannot deny: a prominent membership of the party (Gary Adams, international affairs secretary) was tried and sentenced in 1998/99 for aiding a Dublin landlord evict tenants against their will. This was at a time when we had people like Danielle Ni Dhighe posting her usual line that the IRSM had got its act together, disowned the anti-social elements within its ranks and all that lark. Pretty much what she is up to now. I couldn't believe her then, and I was proven right. And I am still sceptical. The statements emanating from the IRSM/IRSP (via the USA or wherever) should be treated with alot more than a piece of salt. This "movement" is still on political probabtion in my opinion.