You Can't Blow Up a Social Relationship

by Mark C - Contact.ie Tue Mar 10, 2009 07:36

Michael Longley, as many Leaving Cert. students will know, wrote a very interesting poem about how the violence in the North affects all communities. It's called "Wreaths". Here it is:
-----

Wreaths

The Civil Servant
He was preparing an Ulster fry for breakfast
When someone walked into the kitchen and shot him:
A bullet entered his mouth and pierced his skull,
The books he had read, the music he could play.

He lay in his dressing gown and pyjamas
While they dusted the dresser for fingerprints
And then shuffled backwards across the garden
With notebooks, cameras and measuring tapes.

They rolled him up like a red carpet and left
Only a bullet hole in the cutlery drawer:
Later his widow took a hammer and chisel
And removed the black keys from his piano.

The Greengrocer
He ran a good shop, and he died
Serving even the death-dealers
Who found him busy as usual
Behind the counter, organised
With holly wreaths for Christmas,
Fir trees on the pavement outside.

Astrologers or three wise men
Who may shortly be setting out
For a small house up the Shankill
Or the Falls, should pause on their way
To buy gifts at Jim Gibson's shop,
Dates and chestnuts and tangerines.

The Linen Workers
Christ's teeth ascended with him into heaven:
Through a cavity in one of his molars
The wind whistles: he is fastened for ever
By his exposed canines to a wintry sky.

I am blinded by the blaze of that smile
And by the memory of my father's false teeth
Brimming in their tumbler: they wore bubbles
And, outside of his body, a deadly grin.

When they massacred the ten linen workers
There fell on the road beside them spectacles,
Wallets, small change, and a set of dentures:
Blood, food particles, the bread, the wine.

Before I can bury my father once again
I must polish the spectacles, balance them
Upon his nose, fill his pockets with money
And into his dead mouth slip the set of teeth.

by SD Wed Mar 11, 2009 11:39

Sean,

Not too sure what to make of your comments as I was of the opinion that the WSM had 'an anti imperialist policy' with regards to the six counties but of course this is a reaction from you just on a personal capacity? Is there an official WSM position on this latest development? Would the WSM for instance call upon people to support today's actions by the ICTU?

by Irishman Wed Mar 11, 2009 12:45

Where is the Republic of Ireland's reaction. We must take to the streets in protest!

by Diarmuid Wed Mar 11, 2009 13:09

The alleged anarchist article on the recent armed republican actions in Ireland starts off with quite a hysterical attack on Irish Republicanism and those who carried out the actions which looks more like a typical social-democratic rant than anything anarchist. Then it goes on to quote the Workers' Solidarity Movement position paper "On the Partition of Ireland". I reproduce here a part of that:
"The British state is responsible for the long history of armed conflict in Ireland. As long as the British state remains in Ireland there remains the possibility of armed struggle against it, especially when there is no mass movement to demonstrate an alternative to militarism. We have opposed the republican armed struggle because it was an impediment to working class unity. It was based on wrong politics, it was a wrong strategy and it used wrong tactics. However, we refused to blame the republicans for the situation in the six counties. Their campaign was the result of a problem and must not be confused with its cause. In the final analysis, the cause lies with the continuing occupation by the British state.”
It seems difficult to reconcile the opening paragraphs of the article with much of that part of the statement.
The alleged anarchist article then goes on to a long piece on state and private company surveillance which seems tenuously related to the opening paragraphs, almost as though the author had written this article and just before he sent it to Indymedia, he got exercised by the recent news from the 6 Counties and added it to his piece in the introduction.

It's interesting that someone who claims to be a revolutionary should consider soldiers in an imperialist occupying force of one country, who are actually in one of the colonial outpost barracks, to be "off duty". In common with much of the bourgeois media coverage, the inference seems to be that British soldiers waiting to go off and kill people in Afghanistan or Iraq are entitled to safety while waiting to do so on Irish soil.

I do not consider those recent armed actions to be timely or useful at this time but that doesn't mean it's right to jump on the bourgeois condemnation bandwagon.

The record of most of the Irish Left, including most anarchists, with regard to the struggle of the people of the Six Counties, leaves them far below the high ground they claim at times like this.

by Rational Ecologist Wed Mar 11, 2009 13:23

In response to Diarmuid contribution. I find his lack of compassion and sentiments to be quite frightening. The situation in Northern Ireland has moved on. The peace process, while flawed, is progress, however, a lot remains to be achieved. As one who has lost a family member in the " Troubles " I am disgusted by anyone who is unwilling to condemn these murders. Working class Brits killed by working class Irish. I wonder what the anarchist perspective is on that??

by Worker Wed Mar 11, 2009 15:15

I would disagree with refering to this act of thuggery as Republicanism. Calling it a republican act implicitly gives the act some political credence. It was not a political act. It was an apolitical violent act.

So, rather than politicising the issue, call a spade a spade: the muder of the two unarmed off duty soliders, and the muder of a PSNI worker in uniform was an act of thuggery.

Neither of those responsible are worthy of the title republican. They are not republicans. The best thing those on the left can do is to ignore them. ICTU have done the right thing by holding the vigil today. They have almost 150,000 members in the North. I, and many other workers in the south stand in solidarity with them today.

by Rational Ecologist Wed Mar 11, 2009 15:28

I wholeheartedly agree with Worker. The term Republican is much abused and sullied by these psychopaths. These were murders and nothing less. Please do not offer these people any legitimacy. This is not a noble battle against Empire but merely the sociopathic actions of deeply damaged people with a dangerous ideology.

by Sean Matthews Wed Mar 11, 2009 15:48

The article was written in a personal capacity, which reflects the tactical and theoritical unity of the wsm.

www.wsm.ie

by Mike - Judean Popular Peoples Front Wed Mar 11, 2009 18:14

If WSM are indeed an anarchist organisation then it should be a matter of six of one and half a dozen of the other whether Northern Ireland (Ulster/The six counties/whatever yer havin yerself) is "occupied" by soldiers of the United Kingdom, The Republic of Ireland or Outer Mongolia since in either case the soldiers in question would be serving and defending a corrupt, undemocratic, despotic, self serving Government/establishment/state whose very existence they are opposed to.

The same goes for any organisation claiming to be socialist

by Jim K. Wed Mar 11, 2009 19:44

It sickens me how some of you people bang on about the British occupation of the six counties like it was something out of a news flash about Gaza.

There aren't people suffering or dying (except the ones the RIRA and CIRA are murdering).
People aren't being burned out of their homes, beaten down in the streets by a partisan police force.
Catholics are no longer prevented from having an equal share in jobs, housing, civil rights, etc.
All gone. Done and dusted. Kaput. History. We've moved on. We are trying to move towards a British withdrawl by using peaceful means and by methods which will be acceptable to all decent people on this island.and its working.

Some of you people need to drag yourself out of the last century and into this one.

by Lugh23 - Human Being Wed Mar 11, 2009 20:34

Though shocked and saddened by recent events up in Northern Ireland I was moved by todays outbourst of unity and solidarity by both sides of the community. To see men of violence in the past come together and stand side by side in defiance of the violence and murder and say enough is enough. I v made very good friends up the North from both sides of the so called divide and whilst up in Rath Lugh at the M3 protest alot of them came downto support us bringing food, music and friendship. Since then I`v gown to love the North and frequently visit. Funnily enough the last time I went up to Belfast to chillout which I found fairly ironic. I have grown to love the city and the people, though some of the old suspision is still there a bit, I found that everyone I met genuinley fought through this and wanted to know where you were from etc... For the first time in centuries there is curiosity and communication between all communities which is infectious and inspiring. Belfast and the North in general is at last starting to blossom and mature in a beautiful way and how dare anyone try to take that away from them !. It was also moving to see teenagers being interviewed who never experienced the violence or the troubles.They stood confused about what happened but united in they`re non acceptance of it and they are the future of our new Ireland, thank God. It`s time for the North to shine and deservedly so. I think it`s impossible to go back to the bitter taste of hatred and violence once the sweet taste of true freedom is experienced. Viva Northern Ireland and viva peace !.

by Padraic - WSM - personal capacity Wed Mar 11, 2009 22:27

Diarmuid says that he doesn’t “consider those recent armed actions to be timely or useful at this time but that doesn't mean it's right to jump on the bourgeois condemnation bandwagon”. Condeming the actions taken because they are a return to dead end politics and have nothing to offer the working class on this or any other island is a lot different to condemning them because they break the law or because you oppose any sort of political violence.

As Sean points out the logic of a military campaign now is “to drag working-class communities back to conflict and provoke state repression”. There isn’t anything wrong with condemning that and it doesn't mean that the author is in any way espousing bourgeois politics..

by JazzFan Wed Mar 11, 2009 22:40

News Piece and discussion of these recent events on Al Jazeera right now...(22.35 "Inside story" wed 11/03/2009)
should be on the site soon

by Frank Wed Mar 11, 2009 23:52

A pizza before killing in Afghanistan. Or perhaps Iraq, the death toll being in six digits. Jesus the hypocrisy and naivete are vomit inducing.

by Tomas Gorman - IRSP Thu Mar 12, 2009 15:12

ICTU and many other came out on to the streets to defend the Peace Process after the killings over the last few days. What defines the peace process that many politicians are scrambling to defend?

It is quite clear to many that the Peace Process ended when the DUP manoeuvred Sinn Fein into the triple locked Stormont Assembly after having the PIRA disarmed and disbanded. What has resulted is a relatively peaceful but politically retarded situation wherein the underlying cause of conflict here remains unchallenged; the lack of a National Self Determination mechanism.

If the entire population were able to decide as a whole on their constitutional future without interference form London, then the space for militant armed groups to flourish would vanish.

If history has taught anything here, it's that a military or security solution to the National Self Determination question will at most contain armed actions by Republican insurgents with limited success. What is needed is a political response that transcends the banal politicking of condemnation and starts to address earnestly the democratic contradiction of partition it's veto wielding Unionist "Guard Dog". If the people of this island were able to decide on their constitutional future through periodical referenda, Unionists and Republicans along with the left and right could debate and vote on the pros and cons of reunification without preconditions and vetoes held by one side over the other.

It is safe to say that the people of Ireland as a whole do not wish to see politics dictated by weapons and have had more than their fill of bloodshed. To prevent any more blood on our streets, we need to really to define our peace alongside a clear and definitive path towards it.

I think it's also incredibly important to remember that those two soldiers were killed pre tour of duty in Afghanistan. A lot of irish left groups will support resisitance in Iraq or Afghanistan, why can't they commend the favour done for that resistance by the rira?

by None - none Thu Mar 12, 2009 15:30

I find it entirely hypocritical for people to be banging on about "peace" in Northern Ireland.

The struggle for the people of Ireland to achieve socialism is one and the same as that struggle in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Peace in the North is war elsewhere. Troops not stationed in the North are troops elsewhere. Troops not stationed in their barracks, or on guard with their desert fatigues, could be troops slaughtering innocents in Iraq or Afghanistan.

With a typical Celtic Tiger mindset, the WSM (I wont say anarchists, as I consider myself within or close to that spectrum) are saying "were alright jack". It is almost like supporting the export of violence to maintain peace at home. For after all, the western world parasitically live off the slaughter and rape of less developed parts of the world. Sure if they dont do that, would there be violence at home? - of course there would. Capitalism simply wouldnt be sustainable nor "prosperous".

It is not possible to talk about peace while capitalist contradictions remain. Peace is temporal, or in the least, violence is masked.

There has never been peace in Northern Ireland - nor the south. Indeed, all those who die, some 5,400 per year in the south from social deprivation and poverty - are victims of the most brutal terror and violence imaginable by the Irish state while it implements and maintains its property relationships. This implementartion and its consequences are as purposeful as the killing of those three men.

This is mass murder which is culturally masked and accepted. Though I dont recall a WSM statement on that though, or should I say what must amount to hundreds of statements if we are to apply some context in relation to the three soldiers dead vs tens of thousnds form Irish state violence.

Them two soldiers deserve no pitty what-so-ever. They were members of a terrorist organisation and one of the most violent entities on the planet.

While these killings in the North are more than likely politically counterproductive, from a moral and military point of view - they can be justified. The politics of the 32CSM are far more progressive than those of the British state.

by Jim Thu Mar 12, 2009 15:49

"I think it's also incredibly important to remember that those two soldiers were killed pre tour of duty in Afghanistan. A lot of irish left groups will support resisitance in Iraq or Afghanistan, why can't they commend the favour done for that resistance by the rira?"

Are the people of Ireland going to thank you for doing a favour for the Taliban by starting the Troubles again?

Are you that removed from reality?

by Tomas Gorman - IRSP Thu Mar 12, 2009 16:09

I think that your assertion that the recent events will somehow reignite the conflict on the scale that it was before is extremely naive.

The last paragraph of my post was an accurate reflection of the contradiction of some left groups in Ireland when they support foreign resistance movements combating imperialist troops but are far more squeamish when it comes to similar actions close to home.

by Diarmuid Thu Mar 12, 2009 18:56

Quickly reviewing the discussion since I posted my comment on the article, it seems to me that for the most part, the discussion has divided along anti-imperialist and pro-imperialist lines. Of course, many of the pro-imperialist contributors wouldn't see themselves as such but that is the logic of their positions. "Workers in uniform" indeed!

The exception might be the anarchist who wrote to criticise my contribution and to support his comrade. So, to him: Of course a revolutionary anti-imperialist is entitled to criticise an action of any group as being counter-productive etc. But one should pay attention to the terms in which it is done. The terms in which the opening paragraphs of the article were written and also the reference to "off duty soldiers" and no international context belong with the politically naive or the social democrats (when they're not the same thing).

Liberals and social democrats are always quick to accuse revolutionaries of being "heartless" but are quick to withdraw their own hearts when the issue hits too close to home or hurts some of their interests. I saw plenty of that in London when Argentina invaded the Malvinas. Revolutionaries have hearts too but they are not only with our people but also with the people of the world -- and we know who we are against.

But again, to try to forestall some of the hysterical outbursts, I do not consider these 'dissident' Republcan recent acts timeley or helpful at this stage.

by Polecat Fri Mar 13, 2009 02:11

They were first of all fellow human beings. A mother and father's son, a brother, a nephew, a godson, a grandson.

They were serving their country - no matter what country to us it was their country and they were doing a job like any other soldier serving his country.

Nobody deserves to die the way they did no matter what. They were murdered by murderers pure and simple and to confirm it they stood over them after wounding them and shot them on the ground like you would not shoot an animal.

Animals treat their own with more respect for life. Those holding the guns are the devil himself and can enjoy eternity with their master.

RIP the three men who died and left families who will mourn their loss until their dying day.

God help us all that there are such evil men in our world.

by paul o toole Fri Mar 13, 2009 09:23

Two soldiers who wilfully joined the British Army were killed. Sad- yes.
'Ross Kemp in Afghanistan'... comes back with two less British Soldiers. Sad- yes.
How many did they kill in Afghanistan..
......approx 1,000 Afghanis, according to Kemp.....any sadness??- No, none
Approximately 1,500,000 killed in Iraq...any sadness...no None.

The marches should call for an end to all (at least pre-emptive) militarism, and not single out some small insidence for our emotional investment in some quasi patriotic nonsence. This is how the working class have always been led to fight in wars, that the ruling classes are to cowardly to fight in themselves, or even send their own family members.

The double standard and hypocracy is undeniable and almost unbeilevable.

Where were these two young 'boys' going next? ...Afghanistan.

by steve Fri Mar 13, 2009 09:37

The UK with 47 other nations operate, including with some soldiers from the Irish army, in Afghanistan under a UN mandate.

Do republicans support the Taliban killing Irish army soldiers as well ?

The fact you dont have a problem with the Taliban and condem the UN mission, shows the reactionary nature of your politics.

The only other place I see such hatred from is from the far right, yours is simply focussed on "Brits".

by Rational Ecologist Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:15

It seems to me that the rationale of a lot of the contributions to this thread is the return to all-out conflict in NI. This can only be the opinion of those who were not directly affected by the Troubles. The peace, uneasy as it is, has the consent of the overwhelming majority of people living on this island.
A lot of progress has been made, only to be compromised by the actions of a few and the confused ideology of a few others. Time has moved on, things have improved.
I, no-doubt, will be described as an Imperialist-nothing could be further from the truth-but I don't care.

by max Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:29

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

Mahatma Gandhi on Revenge.

the countless hundreds of thousands killed Afghanistan and Iraq
the soldiers in Antrim,
the policeman in Armagh

All these killings are part of the same senseless spiral of violence and negativity In which humanity finds itself. Another dead soldier is another dead human

It is spectacularly ridiculous to attempt to excuse the recent killings in Armagh and Antrim by attempting to paint them as some kind of act of solidarity with the people of Afghanistan. The present truncated political mechanism operating in the entity known as Northern Ireland is far from Ideal however it is a necessary interim solution because all those involved have shown themselves incapable of arriving at any better agreed political resolution to the conflict. These recent killings in Ulster are indicative of extreme cynicism and can only be construed as nihilistic.

--
:-)

by Andrew - WSM (personal capacity) Fri Mar 13, 2009 12:51

I'll comment on this in detail when I've time but for now I just want to point out that some of the contributions from 'republicans' are less than honest. It's pretty clear from the original article that "using two civilian workers as human bait in the assault is disgusting" while the killing of the soldiers and the cop is seen as counter productive militarism which is of course also a tragedy for their friends and family. Also WSM don't have a 'victory to the resistence' position with regard to Iraq nor do we have a 'critical but unconditional defence' position in relation to anti-imperialist struggles in general so while trot groups that do may have a contradictory position here we don't, we have always had a nuanced anti-imperialism that is not afraid to label counter productive and indeed "disgusting" tactics as just that.

For further reading
Capitalist globalisation and imperialism - http://www.wsm.ie/story/825
This is our general position on imperialism

Pacifism,Terrorism and beyond - http://www.wsm.ie/story/837
Deals with the general questions of the use of violence

The Partition of Ireland - http://www.wsm.ie/story/804
The specifics of the situation in Ireland

The Iraqi 'Resistance' - http://struggle.ws/wsm/ws/2005/85/iraqresistance.html
This WS published back in 2005 in WS85, from it "The role of activists in the west has to be to undermine the war effort of our governments and thus force an end to the occupation. In Ireland this means concentrating on the ongoing vital support refuelling at Shannon plays for the US army's supply chain. But rather than blindly cheering on a resistance in Iraq which includes elements that have nothing to offer the Iraqi people we should offer concrete solidarity to those in Iraq who oppose the occupation and are struggling for freedom for Iraqi workers and women."

by Sean Matthews- pc Fri Mar 13, 2009 14:07

Apart from what Andrew and other wsm members have added. From a revolutionary and strategic point of view these attacks with no chance of acheiving political objectives have actually strengthened solidarity between people and politicians, workers and bosses which is obviously something we want to subvert. In the process diverting attention away from the disastrous ring-wing policies pursued by our politicians in times of global recession and growing class struggle.

Personally, I have no love for the police and soldiers in any country but its not really the point. Anyone who thinks these attacks are a boost for 'anti-imperialist' resistance is living in cloud-cooke land. We all know from our recent history the futility of any type of armed campaign, the polarisation w/c communities and sidelining of revolutionary class politics.

In terms of republicanism, in times of growing dissent and dissillusionment this will actually strengthen the position of SF leadership who will say that its us or a return to war which 95% of people dont want.

Updated version here:

http://www.wsm.ie/story/5284

by peace by any means Fri Mar 13, 2009 22:09

Hey Max,
Where do you draw the parallells between revenge and two soldiers being killed in ni, and brits killing all round them in Afghanistan.
You seem to think that there is no connection yet you call the BBrit soldiers 'human', as if they are somewhat innocent in this whole mess.
When universal understanding accepts that all people are human and deserve dignity, the right to exist, and equality amongst all fello humans then there can be a discussion, until then it is a waste of time talking about how 'both communities' have come together without talking also about the communities which the British have ripped assunder not only in this country but the world over. This is not Brit hating because Im British myself, but fact.
Not until we have addressed the underlying causes of Imperilaism will we begin to move in a direction that might be worthy of calling itself 'moving foreward', Otherwise we repeat the same 'mistakes'.
Ireland, once upon a time could raise its voice in outrage at what the Brits were up to, now must shut up because of their involvement in genocidal warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan......and more is the shame on them......Ireland lost its charm...

by Max Sat Mar 14, 2009 14:17

Why doesn't someone head on down to Lurgan and explain to Stephen Carroll's widow how her husband's murder was part of the on going struggle against Global imperialism? I am sure that once she hears some of the well thought out and expertly articulated arguments above she will thank those brave men for removing another Imperialist lackey from our midst.

by Diarmuid Sun Mar 15, 2009 16:00

I have read Sean's revised article which is certainly an improvement on the first version. However it retains the moralistic "disgust" and the de facto detachment of the British soldiers from their imperial army and their actual immediate destination and purpose. That actually sided with the pro-imperialist commentary which has contributed to about half or more of the discussion here.

Most notably, Sean and his supporters have refrained from any criticism of the pro-imperialist chorus in this journal including the suggestion (surely also "disgusting") that opposing British Imperialism in Afghanistan is somehow supporting the Taliban, not to mention the even worse inference that the Taliban somehow ranks higher on a scale of world evils than that of British imperialism and its big brother.

I have in two separate comments already stated that I do not think that these actions (killing of soldiers and a policeman) in the Six Counties were timely or useful.

I'd be inclined to agree when Sean says in his most recent comment that "From a revolutionary and strategic point of view these attacks with no chance of acheiving political objectives have actually strengthened solidarity between people and politicians, workers and bosses which is obviously something we want to subvert. In the process diverting attention away from the disastrous ring-wing policies pursued by our politicians in times of global recession and growing class struggle." However, such one-sided positioning as taken in his original article also, I fear, strengthens the very alliance that Sean states he want to subvert.

Sean goes on to say that he has "no love for the police and soldiers in any country but its not really the point. " He continues: "We all know from our recent history the futility of any type of armed campaign, the polarisation w/c communities and sidelining of revolutionary class politics." This is to accept the analysis of the social-democratic left (including of a number of Trot groups).

The reality is that some types of armed campaign in our recent past actually played an important role and were far from futile, while others were as the writer says. The communities were polarised long before the advent of armed struggle (in which the Republicans were late to the conflct -- Loyalists fired the first shots, blew the first bomb, killed the first civilians and British armed forces; British soldiers followed them and brought arms on the streets). Going back further, one can see how in the Belfast strike of 1907, the Belfast employers, the British Government and the (mainly) British social-democrats all combined to undermine the unity of the working class and to ultimately play the sectarian card. While the role of constitutional Nationalists and of the IRB in that struggle (totally unarmed even though the soldiers opened fire on the Falls Road) were certainly not progressive, it was not they that wreaked the most damage.

Finally, while "side-lining of revolutionary class politics" may have been a product of a heightened anti-imperialist struggle led by Republicans, in which they maneouvered to maintain their leadership at the expense of the revolutionary left, the latter contributed significantly to their own side-lining by their sectarianism, opportunism and failure to put forward a coherent programme for resistance to capitalism incorporating resistance to imperialism in Ireland. The documentation and verification of that would easily fill a good-sized book.

I did not enter this discussion to attack any organisation much less the WSM, but to combat what I saw as a possible swing to the social democratic right from a quarter where I did not expect to encounter it. I regret to say that the contributions emanating from that quarter have contributed little in this discussion that I can see to building revolutionary class politics and quite a bit to its opposite.

Diarmuid

by Sean Matthews (pc) Wed Mar 18, 2009 11:20

The moral indignation of disgust is especially reserved towards the assault on the innocent pizza workers which is what it is.

The same type of tactics used by the Provos in the past such as using contractors as 'human-bombs'. They eventually had to end such tactic due to widespread opposition.

As anarchists, our position in relation to state terrorism and its armed wing here or abroad is quite clear and consistent. One would only need to look at our website and activities we have engaged in.

However, this does not mean we support such armed groups.

Yes, it is true sectarianism and nationalism pre-dates partition and working-class communites apart from a few instances of unity and solidarity which you have outlined were divided.

However, continuing reactionary. attacks on this nature will only bread suspicion and fear resulting in further polarisation and division.

Lastly, I think it is extremely naive to suggest that the armed struggle was in anyway useful, especially given that none of their political objectives have been attained. The opposite scenerio has been the case.

As far as Im concerned the sticks were quite correct in their opposition to a renewed armed campain the last 60s.

This does not mean that I or other anarchists share their stalinist reformist programme. For example, which eventually resulted in them supporting the RUC at the time.

by Kevin Murphy - 32 csm ( personal capacity) Sat May 16, 2009 14:15

Id just like to address a few of the points raised in this hysterical missive

"An anarchist response to the attack on the British Army Barracks in Antrim

The armed and indiscriminate attack on the Massereene British Army barracks in Antrim on Saturday night is futile and counter-productive which only serves to strengthen the status-quo."

Firstly there would have been little point in carrying out an unarmed attack on a British army garrison , therefore your analysis in this regard is quite inane as well as hysterical . Secondly it was in no manner indiscriminate . British soldiers were targetted at the gates of a British army barracks and killed . Those whod ignored warnings not to provide services to occupation troops put themselves directly in the firing line and arent owed any apology .

"The attack has left two off duty soldiers dead, Mark Quinsey, 23, and Patrick Azimkar, 21 as well as four others injured including two pizza delivery workers."

2 other uniformed British soldiers . You seem to have a problem with troops being targetted in their base and differentiate between them being on patrol or on garrison duty Its clear your trying to paint an act of insurgency in a light of "poor chaps just minding their own business shot by cowards". Frankly thus far this analysis is spin , and spin thats no different from the mainstream media , British army , British police and stormont politicians

"Their use and justification of using two civilian workers as human bait in the assault is disgusting and once again highlights the failures of republican militarism. It should be remembered that in the past this was also the practice of the Provisional IRA and other republican armed groups. For example, the Teebane Massacre in 1992 in which eight protestant construction workers were murdered."

What do you mean human bait ? The British army requested they they make deliveires to their troops , not the insurgents . There was no human bait used , this is straight out of the school of Rupert Murdoch reporting . Absolutely dreadful stuff .
If delivery workers choose to visit a British army barracks to provide services to foreign occupying troops in the midst of very public warnings even from Hugh Orde that serious attacks are imminent and that British troops are being used in a combat role against Irish insurgents then those delivery men simply put themselves in the line of fire in what they knew to be conflict situation . It had been on the news all week prior to the operation .
You also neglect to point out that those collaborators killed in Teebane were constructing military facilities . Whether they were doing it as British army engineers or as private contractors is neither here nor there . Presumably youd deny the right to Iraqi insurgents to target private contractors working for occupation forces building military bases on their territory too . Or deny anarchists in spain the right to have targetted anyone building a fascist military fortification despte warnings they were involving themselves directly in an armed conflict.

are those civilian drivers in trains ferrying fascist troops and armaments which were attacked and dynamited by leftist forces owed a posthumous apology ? whats the difference ?

""We must also resist attempts by these highly infiltrated authoritarian armed groups to drag working-class communities back to conflict and provoke state repression. Despite carrying out sporadic attacks they are unable to mount a sustained campaign and have always shown like all paramilitaries they are more of a threat to working-class communities and the building of a viable non-sectarian revolutionary alternative, than the status-quo.""

Interesting . Id like to hear you outline in clearer detail what you believe should be done to combat this menace which you regard as simply another arm of the British occupation forces . For example do you believe the working class should take Martin McGuinness advice and act as informants against them ? Are they traitors to the working class also ?
Surely before urging the working class to resist these people you yourself should outline precisely how the resistance should proceed and what form this resistance should take ? Oterwise your call is just a useless platitutde . If you want the working clas to heed it spell out what form this resistance must take . Otherwise they may be under the impression the WSM support Martin McGuinnesses calls for people to act as informants . Having made this call publicly amidst almost identical calls from the state and politicians the onus is on you to clarify what form resistance against republicans must take . Just as a republican would be called upon to clarify whatform of resistance he envisages against British rule .
you cant just call upon people to resist republicans and not spell it out .

""“The tactic of armed struggle, as carried out by the Republicans, was never capable of forcing the withdrawal of the British state because it was incapable of delivering a military victory over the British army. The British ruling class cares little for the deaths of individual soldiers in its army. The 'commercial bombing campaign' caused civilian casualties and heightened sectarian tensions.

The armed struggle was also faulted because it relied on the actions of a few, with the masses left in either a totally inactive role, or one limited to providing intelligence and shelter to the few. It is claimed that it did serve to maintain the gains made in the 60s and early 70s. The mass campaigns (civil disobedience, rent & rates strike, street committees, etc.) would have been a far greater protection for the gains won than the elitist militarism of a few.""

Im certainly no fan of militarist elitism . However id take issue with your view that gains of any kind were won by anyone . Unless youd take the view that British rule updating , making concessions and therefore strengthening itself in Ireland was some sort of gain for anyone other than whitehall . Which i suppose is in line with the tenor of your quite reactionary and bourgouis analysis thus far .
I note also anarchists did not provide guns for the masses to resist and the provos certainly didnt have them until the mid 80s by which point their leadership was already in a wind down mode and heading for sunningdale mark 2 .
Civil disobediance and rent and rates strikes were effectively wiped out at the stroke of a pen by the actions of those who opposed armed struggle , who went into sunningdale and impelemented legislation permitting with held rent and rates to be recouped from state benefits and wage packets . Not by anyone engaged in armed struggle . The strikes were fully supported and encouraged by those enaged inarmed struggle . To lay the blame for the defeat of that tactic at the feet of the insurgents is highly dishonest in my opinion . More spin in fact .

"The British state is responsible for the long history of armed conflict in Ireland. As long as the British state remains in Ireland there remains the possibility of armed struggle against it, especially when there is no mass movement to demonstrate an alternative to militarism. We have opposed the republican armed struggle because it was an impediment to working class unity. It was based on wrong politics, it was a wrong strategy and it used wrong tactics. However, we refused to blame the republicans for the situation in the six counties. Their campaign was the result of a problem and must not be confused with its cause. In the final analysis, the cause lies with the continuing occupation by the British state.”"

this is completely contradictory . The impediment to working class unity in the north is the British occupation , not armed struggle. There was no armed struggle in the north worth speaking of for 50 years and the place was a completely sectarian shithole . As it remained in the absence of armed struggle to all intents and purposes for the past ten years .

""Following the winding up of ‘Operation Banner’ in July 2007, there are still around 5,000 garrison troops in North based on pre-1969 level. Their role is mainly for training and operations abroad in countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan and additional and technical support to the police if necessary.

This attack comes against the backdrop of the ‘dissident republican threat’ being raised to severe and the MI5 stating that 15% of their resources are geared towards ‘domestic terrorism’. The security agency is now based in a state of the art headquarters at Place Barracks near Hollywood, Co. Down. There are believed to be around 150 military operatives based here.""

therefore their role remains an active and ready one in support of their preferred proxy , the British PSNI . Who work directly under them .

""Last week, also saw fractures begin to emerge at the Policing Board when Chief Constable Hugh Orde announced the re-deployment of the shadowy Special Reconnaissance Regiment (SRR) to target ‘dissident republicans’. In 2005 the 14th Intelligence Company and the Force Research Unit amalgamated to form the SRR who have a history of collusion with loyalist paramilitaries. His announcement was criticised by mainly nationalist politicians from Sinn Fein and the SDLP for failing to announce this at the board and therefore undermining the accountability and scrutiny function of the Board.""

his announcement is doubly farcical given the fact that SAS operatives recently gave video evidence from Iraq evidence in a Diplock court against men from Lurgan who are accused by the British of having engaged in insurgency following the discovery of mortar tubes almost a year and a half ago. The British army have been actively enaged on the ground the entire time .

"This bickering only demonstrates that the Policing Board the District Policing Partnerships are merely ‘talking shops’, despite token gestures of opposition from opportunist politicians. The fact is Hugh Orde is well within his remit based on operational and national security to evade scrutiny."

British national security , British polciing in Ireland . Imperialism , colonialism and occupation . You dont outline any manner in which this should be challenged other than claiming you are for working class unity .

""As the former British Spy master Martin Ingram revealed to the Irish News on Saturday 7th March anyone who believed that British Army Special Forces were not active in Northern Ireland was “living in cloud-cuckoo land.”Special forces have always been an integral part of the state's armed forces and no amount of token reforms designed to camouflage there repressive functions will change this."

Meanwhile, the Guardian Newspaper has recently revealed that the police are storing details in a central database on thousands of individuals who have been attending demonstrations and protests. The information obtained through a Freedom of Information Request revealed police intelligence teams such as FIT are gathering personal information on activists and members of the press.

At the same time, an investigation by the office of the Information Officer Richard Thomas has also revealed the blacklisting of thousands of construction industry workers by a private investigator. It is believed that more than 40 companies paid 66 year old Ian Kerr to spy on its staff. The practise which is officially illegal has always been simmering beneath the surface includes a personal database with references to individuals as potential ‘trouble-makers’, ‘lazy’ and anarchists. So much for the spin we usually get from politicians and the media on our common interests with bosses.

This should come as no surprise as the state’s role is to intimidate and criminalize. In the words of Pierre-Joseph Proudhan

“To be GOVERNED is to be watched, inspected, spied upon, directed, law-driven, numbered, regulated, enrolled, indoctrinated, preached at, controlled, checked, estimated, valued, censured, commanded, by creatures who have neither the right nor the wisdom nor the virtue to do so.

To be GOVERNED is to be at every operation, at every transaction noted, registered, counted, taxed, stamped, measured, numbered, assessed, licensed, authorized, admonished, prevented, forbidden, reformed, corrected, punished. It is, under pretext of public utility, and in the name of the general interest, to be place[d] under contribution, drilled, fleeced, exploited, monopolized, extorted from, squeezed, hoaxed, robbed; then, at the slightest resistance, the first word of complaint, to be repressed, fined, vilified, harassed, hunted down, abused, clubbed, disarmed, bound, choked, imprisoned, judged, condemned, shot, deported, sacrificed, sold, betrayed; and to crown all, mocked, ridiculed, derided, outraged, dishonored. That is government; that is its justice; that is its morality.”

The challenge is to build a mass movement which not only removes the blight of statism and militarism from our society whether in the form of the police, army or paramilitaries, but also virus of capitalism and various shades of reactionary nationalism.""

An unarmed movement that doesn shoot anyone apparently . Seriously , how do you hope to resist this ? with a leaflet ?

""At the end of the day capitalism is a social relationship played out in our everyday lives, in our communites and workplaces based on exploitation of our labour and leisure. It can't be bombed out of existance. Only working-class mass action can get rid of the system and put something better in its place. ""

yes yes yes . And anyone who disagrees this is the best manner to proceed must be resisted firmly . And if calls to resist these people and turn against them happen to be made in the midst of identical calls by the British state , the British police , the British army , The Irish governemnt , DUP and Sinn Fein anarchists shouldnt be remotely embarrased about taking take that position either apparently .
At the end of the day theres a foreign occupation and it will be resisted . But you believe its those who are doing the resisting who must be resisted .

Have you thought about applying for a grant ? Show the authorities this and youll get one for sure .