Another Attempt to Marginalise Republican Socialism

by factual Tue May 09, 2006 00:37

stories about the INLA being drug dealers without proof.....are you mad. The former o/c in Dublin was prosecuted for possession of Heroin. the ballymount gang leader was hired muscle for dealers and the Tallaght crowd were ripping off junkies and dealers.
wake up and smell the coffee...

by seedot Tue May 09, 2006 00:38

The article about dissident republicanism was proposed and accepted as a feature. In the comments section the 32SM engaged and widened the article quite well imo. This option was open to you.

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/75378

is the link you left out.

The other articles you mention use the newswire to promote their own events - the public meeting actually clashes with the Indymedia film night.

Maybe a little less paranoia and more engagement and promotion of your own analysis would better serve those who claim the title 'republican socialists'.

by R. Isible Tue May 09, 2006 02:49

If someone that knows as much about Republican Socialism or dissident Republicanism or whatever takes the time to write something cogent of decent length with insightful points then Indymedia Ireland will feature it.

It's a funny thing, but in general republicans (of all shades, but with the honourable exception of Barry 32CSM) tend to whinge rather than to contribute to Indymedia Ireland. What contributions there are tend to be Press Releases or cut-and-pastes from other fora. You don't get to complain if you're not creating.

In fact, if anything we tend to be too soft on republicans because we'd encourage contributions from a very important strand of Irish political thinking. If you don't believe that then consider the fact that neither I nor Seedot have deleted your completely shite whinge which doesn't do anything to tell anyone what Republican Socialism is. Mhaith an fear.

by Publo Tue May 09, 2006 03:58

Given the lack of contemporary interesting and/or well thought out commentary on Republican Socialism, I'd like to direct attention to C. Desmond Greaves' book 'Liam Mellows and the Irish Revolution'.

Greaves is perhaps best known for his book on James Conolly b ut I came accross the Liam Mellows book a couple of weeks ago (in O'Conollys on Rory Gallagher Square in Cork at 9.99) and am deeply impressed. It was originally publsihed in 1971 but republished in Belfast in 2004 by An Ghlor Gafa.

Not only is it quite frankly a gripping yarn of revolutionary action but the analysis of the Irish Revolution (taken as 1912-22), and particulaly the emphasis on the actions of Griffith and Collins and co in the acceptance of the Treaty and the establsihment of the Free State gives the lie to importance in real terms of 1916.

Greaves' presents the war of independence and the reaction in a light which may clarify for many - as it did for me - the treu purpose of the continued official celebration of 1916 and the concomitant failure to dwell in any detail on the subsequent years up to the civil war.

More than any other commentary or analysis I've come accross, the book breathes life into the ideals of republican socialism, and the stress on the link between labour and republicans therein is really thought provoking.

The IRSP and their comrades may claim to carry the flag of the republican socialism which emerged in 1916. This is a worthy cause and one with which no small part of the population of Ireland today may identify and sympathise with. However, comments such as the above serve only to repel and dissuade serious analysis of the ideals which they purport to serve.

I for one would like to see greater analysis of this subject. The fact that the island remains divided by partition and sectarianism, that industry and the economy is further than ever from being in any way self-sufficient or based on trade developed on terms of mutual advantage and goodwill, and that the system of government continues to oppress, requires serious attention. Give the book a look over, Greaves' work provides a great basis, independant of the self-proclaimed in heritors of the Irish revolution - both paramilitary and state - and may encourage the people themselves to reconsider our future.

Link below is to some info on Greaves.

by Sean N Tue May 09, 2006 05:24

irps + ceasefire = sticks

by pat c Tue May 09, 2006 12:37

"Indymedia" as an entity doesnt write articles; it publishs them. Just as it has published yours. The fact that you think an article is badly written or inaccurate is a matter of opinion. Indymedia has now given you the platform to put across your side of the story.

You have not been marginalised.

by BAFTA Tue May 09, 2006 15:18

full circle
by Sean N Tue May 09, 2006 04:24

irps + ceasefire = sticks

This is one of the best ever contributions to Indymedia well done Sean N you deserve an award!

by grow up Tue May 09, 2006 22:15

" Even the militarist (sic)RSF have been invited to speak."

now we see what the real problem is. John M of Dublin Irsp has been crying on quite a few forums about this. it has driven him to attack RSF on the irbb in particular. the IRSP took part in a similiar discussion in Cork, at which RSF was not invited and did not take part.. But nobody from RSF cried about it, even though any disussion ofn the fiture of Republicanism should at least consider the Republican Movements involvement. makes sense no? yet no whinging, no tears no frustrated idiocy. Your complaints lie with the orgaisers, not with RSF. grow up.

by Sean McDermott Wed May 10, 2006 22:26

If the only change to the IRSP over the years was its ceasefire, why is not one original founding member of the IRSP alive today involved in the party now? Never mind involved , even supportive? That would seem to indicate that even Seamus Costello would not be in them today. Is the IRSP today still Costello's IRSP?

by Poor You Thu May 11, 2006 03:52

Is this really what passes as a News Article or Report on Indymedia?

I wasn't formally invited to the Carrickmacross Pig Races, should I type up and post my disapproval? Help! Help! I'm being opressed!

by Comrade Smurf - IRSP Thu Jun 08, 2006 00:16

I agree with the person who began this topic. To label the IRSP 'dissident' is absurd as they never signed up to the GFA or the Provisional's pacification process. It was an example of sloppy writing.

The IRSP is the only organically working class socialist party I know. The RSM has a lot to offer the Irish working class and many contributions to make. They just need a better way to get their message out, imo.

by Donnchadh Thu Jun 08, 2006 03:14

The whole use of the word "dissident" is an example of sloppy, careless thinking. Just because PSF decided to recognise the free state and take British ministries dosnt mean that traditional republicans, who have always remained loyal to the 32 county Republic declaired in 1916, are dissenting from that decision. What a group of born again free staters decide is their own business - it has nothing to do with those who never accepted British Imperialism - in any guise. Really the British and free staters are just using the word "dissident" the way they used to use the word "provo" and for the same reasons.