Document up for debate!

redflag32

With the recent debate in Dublin regarding the future of republicanism, i taught it would be good to get debate going here also.We all know where my allegence lays and i make no apology for it.Im afraid i can only come to this debate from the corner i am struggling in and not anybody elses,in saying that i dont want to come across as if im pushing my beliefs on anyone,i just would like to get debate going,and if i do seem as if im putting someone elses opinions below mine i apologise,but i can only debate from my corner,not everybodies.

I have linked to a IRSM document which i have great respect for,i would like to offer it up for debate here.I am not looking for childish slurs or put downs,and if youhave nothing progressive to say then dont say it.Im not expecting anyone to have faith in this document but i would like resons why you have difficulties understanding the reality and truth it exposes about the irish situation.

Saoirse go deo.

http://irsm.org/history/rtrinireland.html

Ok I'm going to give this the benefit of the doubt for now and let people discuss it.
Please report posts though rather than discuss your problems with it,in the thread.
I have deleted all the off topic posts.

To the thread starter-please read the charter of this board before you continue to post.
The guidelines for posting are there to make this place a good read for all and to help the course of discussion to run smoothly.
Please read all of it carefully.
Your last thread here was binned because you cannot post articles here and then run away-you must include your own opinion with them and let the discussion flow from there.

You are already breaking the charter here by expressing your opinion as fact-specefically when you are describing the article you linked to as "but i would like resons why you have difficulties understanding the reality and truth it exposes about the irish situation. "

That would be your opinion and perhaps the opinion of a tiny minority along with you.
It is not fact.
There is no prohibition here on expressing an opinion and supporting that opinion,except where its deemed to be inappropriate by the mods of politics or the admins/smods.
It's not easy to determine what is inappropriate but for example advocating illegal activities would be.

Now on topic anyone that wants to continue discussing this topic.

Lemming

The problem with polar articles (or arguments) is just that. Polarity. Allow me to use the quotation of someone in recent times to some it up

"You are either with us, or against us".

-- George Bush, President, United States of America

And before anyone starts howling or going off on seperate tangents about US imperialism, or fluffy bunny rabbits, that quote is entirely accurate in context of the above linked article.

It is absolute dross and utterly blinkered. I got through about the first two sections before deciding my time was better spent elsewhere.

All rather convenient bringing polarity into your argument. Support us or by default be lumped with our enemies. It also conveniently does away with all opposition to the "revolutionary" movement. Herein lies a major problem with what happened inside the USSR. With nobody to keep you in check and keep you relatively honest, power corrupts. And absolute power (since there is no opposition) corrupts absolutely.

RedFlag, what you refer to is nothing less than a coup of the recognised government, rightly oir wrongly, who were elected by the vast majority of the population of this island.

Not to mention your notions of revolution would utterly bankrupt the country into the process. Foreign investment would disappear with a click of the finger to more stable climates. So even if you had overwhelming support for a mickey-mouse revolution, it'd disappear soon after when there are lots of starving, miserable people wanting better lives when they have no money and no jobs. That "popular base" wouldn't be so "popular" for very much longer.

murphaph

Ok, I had a read of it and I didn't come away feeling particularly enlightened, which is no doubt clouded by my own biases but nonetheless, here goes;

However, the fact to be grasped is that we can no longer restrict our interpretation of revolution to mere military action against the British in the North-East, and at the same time expect a wide response from the people. If we are ever to gain a mass basis for our efforts, then we can only hope to do so when we place such military action in proper perspective. That is, when we can demonstrate to the people that such action is necessary and vital to the implementation of policies which, in turn, relate to a social, political and economic programme that offers the people at large positive prospect of a better way of life.

I am trying to imagine a 'good reason' that will persuade the bulk of the people of this island that 'military action' (I use quotation marks because I would call it terrorism) against british forces, PSNI etc. is necessary to improve the way of life of the people of the '26 counties'. If the goals of the IRSP programme are good enough then the people would surely want them implemented in the '26 counties' and surely this socialist utopia would be the envy of the '6 counties' which would all realise their error in sticking it out with capitalist GB and would promptly voluntarily enter the socialist republic, without any loss of life. Surely it's better to take longer to achieve your socialist republic without bloodshed than achieve it more promptly with bloodshed?

I'm a socialist myself. Not a republican in the sense you would understand, ie, I have no designs on NI and am happy with my own 26 county republic. I am also a moderate socialist, believing that ultimately human beings are greedy/ambitious/hungry for advancement and that financial gain will ALWAYS motivate people more than any socialist paradise. I believe that the less well off should be taken care of through social policies etc. like most people I imagine. I also firmly believe in being able to vote for your government (surely a guiding principle of any republic!), even if that government is not the best that it could be.

#15

redflag32 wrote:

With the recent debate in Dublin regarding the future of republicanism, i taught it would be good to get debate going here also.We all know where my allegence lays and i make no apology for it.Im afraid i can only come to this debate from the corner i am struggling in and not anybody elses,in saying that i dont want to come across as if im pushing my beliefs on anyone,i just would like to get debate going,and if i do seem as if im putting someone elses opinions below mine i apologise,but i can only debate from my corner,not everybodies.

I have linked to a IRSM document which i have great respect for,i would like to offer it up for debate here.I am not looking for childish slurs or put downs,and if youhave nothing progressive to say then dont say it.Im not expecting anyone to have faith in this document but i would like resons why you have difficulties understanding the reality and truth it exposes about the irish situation.

Saoirse go deo.

http://irsm.org/history/rtrinireland.html

What a pile of sh1te.

A very tedious and long winded document.

I have difficulties understanding it because it is neither the truth or the reality about the irish situation.

This is very much a case of republican and socialist ideological aspirations clashing with reality.

In what way would the country be better off if we had this 32 county socialist paradise?
Im sure we would benefit from unionist terrorists who would fight for partition again. That would be great for the economy.

Where has socialism worked before?

P.S The history section of that site is a joke. The war traces its roots to 1167. Yeah right. You do realise that republicanism is a relatively new concept in historical terms??
Where were the republicans in the 15th and 16th centuries? Fighting for the catholic King James at the Battle of the Boyne?? There is not a shred of evidence for irish separatism in that period. There were many rebellions, but not one leader spoke of separatism or independence. They spoke of alliances with france or spain, but not of independence.
Mods, I realise this seems off topic, but the OPs assertion that this site speaks the truth needs to be corrected.

#15

has the OP no comment to make?:rolleyes:

edanto

redflag32 wrote:

I am not looking for childish slurs or put downs,and if youhave nothing progressive to say then dont say it.Im not expecting anyone to have faith in this document but i would like resons why you have difficulties understanding the reality and truth it exposes about the irish situation.

It's a talk-a-lot-say-nothing mumbo jumbo document that mixes truisms with conjecture; and appeals to rose-tinted memories of distant revolutions.

The facts, as I see them, are that today in Ireland we have a functioning political system and if you want to change anything you have to do it by being elected. The time for revolutions has passed.

That document is almost a call to arms without any particular purpose in mind and no specific ideology other than the reunification of Ireland. It talks of social reconstruction without giving any specifics and invisible 'enemies' that we must unite to stand against (echoes of Bush's war on a concept).

To my eyes, that document has no credibility, mainly because of it's outdated call to revolution and the fact that it doesn't mention a single specific change that would be made after the revolution other than a couple of nice-sounding guiding principles.

But in those nice-sounding principles, it's not much different to our current leaders, so why join the revolution?

sceptre

redflag32 wrote:

How is this spam?this is the political section is it not?have you nothing to say about the document?

As the forum charter would tend to indicate, if you've nothing to say about the document yourself the thread is a non-starter. Given that Earthman's decided to be charitable and not bin the thread for this reason (yet) I'm not binning it for now but if you don't come back relatively soon (and by relatively soon I mean tomorrow as you've had five days which you wouldn't have had without a little benefit-of-doubt charity) with something to say about the topic you decided to start by discussing the stuff you decided to link to that's what I or someone else is likely to be doing. Clock's ticking, get typing.

Before you do that I'm not even going to consider clicking on your link, let alone consider my discussing any of it.

biko

A truly revolutionary programme for Ireland must, of necessity, be diametrically opposed to the existing order of things, this is only logical, and since Ireland now functions according to the dictates of capitalism, then, it is but common sense to suggest that an Irish revolutionary movement must found its programme on the principles of Revolutionary Socialism. There exists no other known alternative.

Although I myself would have leftist sympathies I don't really see that this is necessarily a truth. There are alternatives to Revolutionary Socialism - for instance parliamentary socialism. If IRSP could secure enough votes they would be a force to reckon with, they could take the SF route to power so to speak (although with a slightly different agenda).

A violent overthrow is not really a feasible option at this point in time. I'm sure the INLA has the will (even the IRA considered INLA being "wild boys") but a democratic process is the best option.

REDFLAG32, this is the second time you have started a thread and been asked to provide personal input but neglected to do so. You do not participate in the debate, merely throw up documents and expect feedback. Do you want us to correct spelling mistakes too?

#15

redflag should be banned for this crap

sceptre

#15 wrote:

redflag should be banned for this crap

I somehow suspect you believe that because of his politics rather than his posting. Not that I'm saying that isn't on the cards if he decides do to a post and run again. Either way I don't ban people for their politics, I prefer to do it for their idiocy where that exists.

Clock's stopped ticking, thread locked as per notification above.

redflag32, do not post again without having at least a cursory examination of the guidelines for posting.