Anarchists organise Anti-War Demonstration

[public sector]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KA9QKgcNRM"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KA9QKgcNRM[/ame]

[smashthestate]

Republicanism has been fuzzy on the concept of class before, nobody is denying that but I think modern Republican Socialism isn't really comparable to your above statement.

For another thread perhaps but the entire notion of 'national liberation' movements supposes that there is a more progressive faction of the bourgeoisie to get behind. The irsp at least in their pamphlet on same aknowledge that the NL movement is a cross class movement which must align with the petty bourgeoisie. Anarchism has to my mind never lined up with the ruling class yet time after time throughout history we have seen successful republicans turn into the worst captalists once they gain an ounce of power.
Then again, I don't doubt for a second that when most republicans here talk about 'class' they seem to be talking about sociological class (taken from the red-tops) rather than relationship to means of production or anything meaningful to revolutionaries.

[smashthestate]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KA9QKgcNRM

Ah, the myth, reified, what a solid argument.

Should be the people of Africa seek a ‘third way’ with the Boers, who have murdered, robbed and raped their way across several African countries? The answer is a resounding no, the people of Zimbabwe and elsewhere have the right to stand up and to take back what is rightfully theirs.

Are you comparing protestants to the Boers? Do you understand why good friends of mine who come from working-class protestant areas of belfast and are part of the revolutionary left would never show up at the Divis flats or markets for your 'anti-imperialist' demos?

[FTA69]

[quote=soundmigration;209171]

Perhaps i'n naive, and i know i'm not in the loop re conversations within the republican movement at this time, but its clear that there is some jockying for posistions after the Shinners move to stormont. This isnt a jugdement of good or bad, but an observable fact. Like i say i'm unsure of the over lap of differing republican grouping etc, and by the very secret nature of some of the groupings it hard to get a clear picture. Its in this context that the offending sentence comments

I don't suscribe to that point; nobody is trying to rival each other or "outgun" each other. The Irps and the 32s are working together on a common platform while Éirigi are formulating themselves and concentrating on their own agendas. Nobody is popping off at each other and I think there is broad consensus within Irish Republicanism on the issue of this march.

Its clear that the term 'outgun' is over egging it and indeed i can see how it could be offensive. That was not an intended result.and anyone who has worked with WSM knows thats not our bag

Without sounding twee using a word like "outgun" when referring to Republican discourse is going to provoke people a small bit for obvious reasons.

As anarchists we see nationalism as a dead end ideaology. Does it matter if capitalists and a political and business elite are irish? They still steal our wealth and control our lives. Nationalist's nor republicans have never outlined how that fits with libertarian socialism.

I don't think any Republican organisation is espousing the virtues of capitalism and the long lessons of our history have demonstrated that the political and business elite are fairly opposed to our ideology.

Nationalist socialism does have a very bad press in history.

Comparing Republican Socialism to 1930s National Socialism demonstrates an astounding lack of understanding of both concepts to be honest.

The WSM have nothing in common with nationalism(s), but we do have a good understanding of the north, and we make those arguments openly and honestly. Trying to make a 'cross community' argument around an issue like this is pretty difficult and as i've said before a press release can't really do justice to the complexity of issues here.

But that's exactly what the article tries to do, it over-simplifies the issue completely and insinuates we're a sectarian shower of hardmen trying to get one up on the Prods and each other.

but i'm unsure how else we could attract people from a protestant background to an anti-imperailsit march.

Because I think the reality that Unionism and working-class Loyalism in Ireland are inherently reactionary ideologies doesn't fit in with some people's utopian view of cross-class unity.

I'm somewhat surprised by the number of folks here who not only dont want to work with us any more, but by the fact that there already are so many republicans involved and working alongside us already.

That's the thing to remember. I made great friends within the WSM and while I'll argue the b*llocks off them regards Cuba or whatever else I always found them committed and dedicated, on an organisational and personal level. I'd disregard the other comments, some people tend to place too much priority on what is said on these boards. The reality is that Anarchists and Republicans have a good working relationship on many issues and that should be maintained. Anonymous comments on message boards shouldn't change peoples' attitudes too much.

It would be great if you outlined what specific campiagns, projects, unions, anti racist actvity etc this actually is. This isnt being factecious but a genuine ask. Of the past few years there is only one group(to the best of my knowledge, but i'd be happy to be wrong and shown otherwise) that we have worked with, and it has to be said that that has been in a genuinely open constuctive and comradely manner, both politically and personally.

The Republican group to which you are alluding has done great work with the WSM on the Shell to Sea issue, I'm sure other issues may come up in the future in which co-operation will be beneficial.

Our libertarian nature has, id say, brought a useful tendency and example to those tired of authoratarian republicanism. There is no back doors with the WSM. (and that not an insinutation to anyone else, just a statement of fact).

Fair enough, but the fact is that there are many changes ongoing within Republicanism, and there is indeed much discussion on the failures of the past authoritarian models which we have had since the 1920s.

All and all, I believe that this statement was very badly worded, and undoubtedly p*ssed people off. Such is politics, but sometimes you should be looking at the wider wood instead of concentrating on some of the trees.

[FTA69]

[quote=smashthestate;209279]

For another thread perhaps but the entire notion of 'national liberation' movements supposes that there is a more progressive faction of the bourgeoisie to get behind.

I don't suscribe to that myself, I believe in national liberation but only on a socialist basis ie James Connolly's writings.

Then again, I don't doubt for a second that when most republicans here talk about 'class' they seem to be talking about sociological class (taken from the red-tops) rather than relationship to means of production or anything meaningful to revolutionaries.

I talk in the latter sense, as did the likes of Connolly and Costello.

[smashthestate]

I don't suscribe to that myself, I believe in national liberation but only on a socialist basis ie James Connolly's writings.

I talk in the latter sense, as did the likes of Connolly and Costello.

Both Connolly and Costello aknowledged the cross-class nature of national liberation.

[smashthestate]

Because I think the reality that Unionism and working-class Loyalism in Ireland are inherently reactionary ideologies doesn't fit in with some people's utopian view of cross-class unity.

But republicanism has nothing to offer, nor does it even try to offer, for people from loyalist/unionist communities who want socialism and reject the myths of irish and british nationalism. I will be staying with protestants while in Belfast this weekend, like I said, who are revolutionaries but couldn't give a **** about your march simply because they see you as being for the most part as bad. I think its a case that republicans know they have nothing to offer protestant communities so they just ignore the problem.

[FTA69]

Both Connolly and Costello aknowledged the cross-class nature of national liberation.

Equally they acknowledged the fact that only a genuine working-class movement could free Ireland, and that freeing Ireland and removing the British imperialist presence is a vital component of building socialism here.

But republicanism has nothing to offer, nor does it even try to offer, for people from loyalist/unionist communities who want socialism and reject the myths of irish and british nationalism.

Loyalism and socialism are completely incompatible because Loyalism is based on the supremacy of 20% of the population to the rest. Likewise Loyalism clung to Britain out of fear that their hegemonous position in the north of Ireland would be threatened, not to mention the religious and bigotted streak that runs through Loyalism and Unionism. The northern state is a Unionist entity, built on sectarianism. Republicanism is well able to accomodate Protestants seeking the liberation of Ireland and broader society, there are plenty of examples of this on the past. It isn't however able to accommodate Loyalism and Unionists with a superiority complex. Trying to portray the situation of nationalists and unionists in Ireland as an equitable one is simply fallacious.

who are revolutionaries but couldn't give a **** about your march simply because they see you as being for the most part as bad.

Revolutionaries my hole. If they think opposing imperialism and the celebration of RIR mercenaries in Ireland is "bad" then they aren't revolutionaries at all, rather a pack of eejits.

I think its a case that republicans know they have nothing to offer protestant communities so they just ignore the problem.

Not really, rather Republicans realise sectarianism is a product of British rule in Ireland, not in any false notions that Republicanism is sectarian.

[mp3]

Wow ok like i said i dont ahve a lot of time but this article posted is pretty weak. however think the last sentence speak for itself

As this article started out as a bit of WSM bashing i had a quick look...oops

Well picked a fairly good example of revolutionary change. i seriously hope that the people of ireland dont get a get a Mugabe....but makes sense when the author is a fan of Stalins 'socialism' not the best model for liberating the masses

The debate isn't about Stalin or Mugabe. It's about the gas and water positions of the left - discredited one hundred years ago by Connolly and Lenin. If the Anarchist concept of freedom is so grand, why did www.wsm.ie not permit the article to be posted on its website in response to their position?

[KillinSnakes]

an anarchist posted a statement on a forum called irishrepublican.net saying that you look down on republicans and don't like em, then act surprised when people react to that.

so why was it posted, if not to provoke a response?