If Sinn Fein was in Power in coalition. Would they stick to their ideals?

Bob Z

What would happen if Sinn Fein got into power with Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael? Look at the Green Party they had to compromise to join Fianna Fáil. Would Sinn Fein do the same? How would effect their supporters? Especially if they were in power now during the recession.

I dont mean to turn this thread into a slagging match i would like considered opinion.

amcalester

What ideals? Apart from a united Ireland.

All they do is say No to whatever the other parties policies.

So your question should read,

If Sinn Fein was in power, would they disagree with their own policies?

Bob Z

amcalester wrote: »

What ideals? Apart from a united Ireland.

All they do is say No to whatever the other parties policies.

So your question should read,

If Sinn Fein was in power, would they disagree with their own policies?

Yes but aren't they Marxist? Also if they had started to go along with Goverment cuts wouldn't working class people who supported them become disillusioned?

FTA69

Yes but aren't they Marxist?

They are in their holes. They're soft left if anything and are moving increasingly toward the centre in their social and economic policies. They seem to have quietly abandoned the notion of universal access to free healthcare, and as we saw during the last general election they brazenly u-turned on their manifesto and were desperate to get into coalition with Fianna Fáil. Adams has spoken on numerous occasions about how SF is a "pro-business party". To tell you the truth Sinn Féin is completely controlled by a northern-based leadership which hasn't the slightest clue about southern politics. The whole ethos of the Provisional Republican Movement is one of northern nationalism, everything revolves around securing the Catholic community in the north; there is nothing really radical or revolutionary underpinning that movement anymore.

Also if they had started to go along with Goverment cuts wouldn't working class people who supported them become disillusioned?

That's already happening and in my opinion the party is beginning to stagnate. When they went chasing the upper-middle class vote they fell between two stools. It was their radicalism and hard community graft which made them so popular in the first place, not warbling on about the peace process and all-Ireland agendas; things the southern electorate couldn't give a f*ck about.

amc,

All they do is say No to whatever the other parties policies.

This is untrue. While slightly unrefined they were the prime movers in articulating an alternative view of society as well as the chief campaigners on certain issues. This earned them a lot of credibility amongst working people in Ireland. As far as I'm concerned Sinn Féin up until a few years back represented the best vehicle to advance change in this country.

lostexpectation

all that marxist and they'll increase they'll double our taxes is rubbish, they drop it all in power particularily in coalition.

sligobhoy67

Bob Z wrote: »

Yes but aren't they Marxist? Also if they had started to go along with Goverment cuts wouldn't working class people who supported them become disillusioned?

Marxist! what decade are you getting your information from?

Bob Z

sligobhoy67 wrote: »

Marxist! what decade are you getting your information from?

Oh so what are they now?

Biggins

sligobhoy67 wrote: »

Marxist! what decade are you getting your information from?

I think the poster was refering to something that happened a while ago.

Quote from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sinn_F%C3%A9in

One section of the Army Council wanted to take them down a purely political (Marxist) road, and abandon armed struggle.

I did read that their ideology was based around Marxist ideas but I think they have tailored it down to make it palatable for the Irish people to swallow.

http://www.answers.com/topic/sinn-f-in also provides more info on that subject.

---

If Sinn Fein got into power, I, myself would have some serious concerns.

FTA69

Oh so what are they now?

A bit left of centre.

The split that occurred in 1969 was not really about Marxism or the move left, it was about the winding down of Óglaigh na hÉireann and the decision by the Goulding faction of the Republican Movement to drop the policy of abstentionism from Leinster House, Stormont and Westminister. More importantly with the outbreak of the conflict in 1969 the IRA was unprepared for the defence of Nationalist areas from Loyalist pogroms, instead Goulding had sold many of the arms to the Free Wales Army. By 1970 you had the Officials (Sticks) under Goulding who later went on to form the Workers' Party and attempt to build a political base and the Provos who were concentrating on launching an armed struggle against the Brits.

While the Provos were initially more conservative than the Sticks they still contained a core of left-wing people, by the 1970s the movement was socialist in outlook, however it was never Marxist at all. If you want to have a look at a Marxist movement look at the Viet Cong.

In recent times, the "Sinn Féin are Marxists" argument was propagated by the likes of Michael McDowell in a scaremongering attempt to insinuate they'd wreck the economy if put in charge. The truth was that while Sinn Féin were on varying degrees of the left, they were never Marxist. At the moment they can't be considered anything other than centre or soft left.

Liam Byrne

the winding down of Óglaigh na hÉireann

That'd be Willie O'Dea's job : http://www.military.ie/

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

FTA69

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That'd be Willie O'Dea's job : http://www.military.ie/

The majority of Óglaigh na hÉireann rejected the Anglo-Irish Treaty and remained consituted as the IRA, the minority reconstituted as the Free State Army, whose decendants you are alluding to. Óglaigh na hÉireann is referring to the Volunteers of Ireland i.e the IRA, the term long preceeds the foundation of the Free State Army. What you are suggesting is that the Free Staters are in effect the direct decendants of the 1916 Volunteers.

Now, I've put forward my point of view and I'm leaving it at that. I am absolutely in no circumstances getting into a protracted debate about Free Staters.

FTA69

donegalfella wrote: »

James Connolly, one of the leaders of the 1916 Rising, said 'the currents of revolutionary thought in Ireland, the socialist and the nationalist are not antagonistic but complementary.'"

Sinn Féin claim to be socialist, the term socialism doesn't automatically equate with Marxism. Sinn Féin also have a billboard in West Belfast with a picture of Castro on it stating "for there to be a revolution there must be a revolutionary party". That statement is complete balls when one considers they aren't that far left of the Green Party.

In other words, according to Connolly, the "full meaning" of the term "Sinn Féin" involves a Marxist restructuring of society that he calls "Industrial Reconstruction."

James Connolly was never a member of Sinn Féin, his essay does not represent Sinn Féin at the time (he was a member of the Irish Socialist Republican Party), rather the essay is his reflection on the concept of "ourselves alone", it has nothing to do with Sinn Féin policy in 1908; he is simply stating the need for SF to adopt Socialist principles (of which they had none), he isn't speaking on their behalf. Sinn Féin at that time was under the control of Arthur Griffith, a convinced monarchist and capitalist. The same Griffith actually railed against Connolly's workers five years later during the 1913 Lockout

And the same James Connolly is given pride of place today on Sinn Féin's website, in the "overview" to the party's policies.

Connolly is claimed by everyone. He was a radical Marxist Republican but yet today his legacy is claimed by the Provos, Labour, the Socialist Party and even Fianna Fáil when it suits them. The fact he was a Marxist and is featured on the SF website proves nothing; he is like an Irish version of Che Guevara, lauded by many who don't even have a real idea of his politics. Even far-right nationalists commemorate Connolly, he is a Republican icon.

Sinn Féin may downplay their Marxism somewhat in their effort to grab votes—but the illiberal undertones are obviously still there.

What Marxism? I was in Sinn Féin for five years and I can tell you for a fact it isn't Marxist, it wasn't back in 2002 when I first joined and it certainly isn't now. Marxism put simply is the concept that the industrial workers will take ownership over the means of production, the creation of a classless society and the abolition of private property.

Perhaps you could explain to me Sinn Féin's alledged Marxism, you obviously have better insight than I do because I saw little evidence of it after five years of membership.

barneyeile

Bob Z wrote: »

What would happen if Sinn Fein got into power with Fianna Fáil or Fine Gael? Look at the Green Party they had to compromise to join Fianna Fáil. Would Sinn Fein do the same? How would effect their supporters? Especially if they were in power now during the recession.

I dont mean to turn this thread into a slagging match i would like considered opinion.

If Sinn Fein ever got into power, would the last person to leave the country please turn out the lights!

FTA69

I find it hilarious that some people are still suscribing to this view of a Machiavellian/Marxist/Fascist/insert-dastardly-term IRA Army Council using Sinn Féin to subvert the state etc when the fact of the matter is that they are simply a run of the mill party well on the road to political reformism. There's nothing special about them, no more than the Worker's Party of the late-80s.

barneyeile

FTA69 wrote: »

I find it hilarious that some people are still suscribing to this view of a Machiavellian/Marxist/Fascist/insert-dastardly-term IRA Army Council using Sinn Féin to subvert the state etc when the fact of the matter is that they are simply a run of the mill party well on the road to political reformism. There's nothing special about them, no more than the Worker's Party of the late-80s.

A run of the mill party? Are you SERIOUS? Would you trust a political party that used to have it's own private army? A United Ireland remains their only goal and that has been parked for the foreseeable future by the people of this Island. As a result they should be defunct.

Sand

SF arent a run of the mill party. In most parties or organisations the phrase "they know where all the bodies are buried" is a metaphor, not the literal truth.

Irlbo

Sinn Fein would be a perfect coalition partner for Fianna Fail,as they are very much the same,all things to all people,socialist yet pro capitalist,internationalist yet deeply nationalist,secular yet passionately catholic,they are a party which waves whichever flag you want them to,their membership is a diverse mix,militant republicans,nationalists,pan-nationalists,career driven ego-maniacs,socialists,communists,marxists,no other party could cater for people which such opposing ideals,theres no doubt that they have a strong community base in particular areas,due to good groundwork espiecially on bread and butter issues,but to answer the threads question?,just look at their participation in Stormount,and being all to eager to hop in bed with the DUP,shouldnt think throwing away afew ideals would be a big deal in regards Fianna Fail

Bob Z

FTA69 wrote: »

I find it hilarious that some people are still suscribing to this view of a Machiavellian/Marxist/Fascist/insert-dastardly-term IRA Army Council using Sinn Féin to subvert the state etc when the fact of the matter is that they are simply a run of the mill party well on the road to political reformism. There's nothing special about them, no more than the Worker's Party of the late-80s.

Well i thought they were marxist but i didnt think they were Machiavellian/Fascist/insert-dastardly-term

Nodin

barneyeile wrote: »

A run of the mill party? Are you SERIOUS? Would you trust a political party that used to have it's own private army?

Well, at one stage or another Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, and what was Democratic Left (now integrated into the Labour party) all had some form of paramilitary association. So did the DUP for a while. It's not really that much of a show stopper.

andrewh5

Sand wrote: »

SF arent a run of the mill party. In most parties or organisations the phrase "they know where all the bodies are buried" is a metaphor, not the literal truth.

Absolutely! They have a fair number of (ex) terrorists, murderers and criminals in their membership as well. There aren't many other political parties with convicted murderers in their ranks.

Nodin

andrewh5 wrote: »

Absolutely! They have a fair number of (ex) terrorists, murderers and criminals in their membership as well. There aren't many other political parties with convicted murderers in their ranks.

Only if you confine it to current times and Ireland. And forget that not all 'murderers' get convicted.

Mickdots

FTA69 wrote: »

I find it hilarious that some people are still suscribing to this view of a Machiavellian/Marxist/Fascist/insert-dastardly-term IRA Army Council using Sinn Féin to subvert the state etc when the fact of the matter is that they are simply a run of the mill party well on the road to political reformism. There's nothing special about them, no more than the Worker's Party of the late-80s.

exactly!!

its history repeating itself!! sinn fein are doing what the sticks did 25 years ago!! there gradually falling away!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Bob Z

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It might have originated with Marx but isn't there different types of types of socialism?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Nodin

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

...and to try to label all types of socialists as marxists is feckin pedantic s/hite talk to the rest of us.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Nodin

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well it could also be called a form of genetic fallacy, but occassionally I just call it like I see it.

And I'm being perfectly civil, ty:D.

FTA69

barneyeile wrote: »

A run of the mill party? Are you SERIOUS? Would you trust a political party that used to have it's own private army? A United Ireland remains their only goal and that has been parked for the foreseeable future by the people of this Island. As a result they should be defunct.

A United Ireland isn't their only goal, you're only spoofing now. Technically on their constitution they are calling for a Democrati Socialist Republic, in reality that idea has now been watered down to an "Ireland of Equals". Unity isn't their only policy.

The fact is comes from an armed tradition isn't anything new inan Irish context. The likes of Pat Rabbitte was a former member of the Official IRA as was Pronsios De Rossa, both leadership figures in the Labour Party. A Taoiseach of this country actually brought arms into Ireland to equip subversives.

The Provisional IRA now exists in name only, SF are no more distinct than anyone else in their mediocrity.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

FTA69

donegalfella wrote: »

From this, it seems clear that socialism is a theory based on the works of Marx and Engels, and that it is therefore Marxist.

The term socialism existed before Marx began his theses; while he did coin the term "communism", the concept of socialism preceeded him. In Capital he himeslf looks at the different types of socialism, such as primitive or crude socialism (mechanical socialism) and what he described as scientific socialism. Fabian Socialism is also another concept distinct from Marxist socialism. As I said in my earlier post Marx envisioned a society were the industrial workers would seize the means of production and private property would be abolished. Marxism also contains such elements as the labour theory of value and most importantly dialectics, the concept of historical progression ultimately leading to an evolution into a classless, or communist society.

Now, perhaps you would like to explain the aspects of Sinn Féin policy that correspond with the above?

And this explicit association with a Marxist revolutionary means nothing?

Nothing at all. All it means is that Sinn Féin are attempting to use radical, rhetorical imagery in order to convey the impression that they are somehow distinct and on edge when in reality they are centre-left.

Yes, that's it exactly. It's Connolly's reflection on the concept of "Sinn Féin," which he very explicitly understands as a Marxist concept.

He provides his own analysis on what "Sinn Féin" should entail, as I said he was never a member of the party and in its initial stages that party was distinctly capitalist and reformist.

Connolly linked radical socialism with the national question, an alliance that has never been fully disentangled since, as evidenced by his proud place on the Sinn Féin website today.

The concept that Republicanism should be linked with social struggles was around long before Connolly. As far back as the United Irishmen Tone spoke of the "men of no property"; the likes of Fintan Lalor and Mitchell spoke of the social injustices in Ireland and the need to connect with those. Robert Emmet's manifesto spoke of nationalising church land and the creation of a Republic based on egalitarian principles. The IRB gave much focus to the issue of the peasantry and land agitation. Connolly rounded these ideas up and provided a succinct analysis of the situation in his book Labour in Irish History, he didn't invent the concept of the social and national aspirations being linked.

As I said, Connolly is also given pride of place amongst all shades of national opinion, some of which who are explicitly anti-Marxist such as Fianna Fáil who have a commemoration at his graveside every year.

You may argue that the radical Marxist element splintered off to form the Workers Party; I say only that the tree lies not far from the apple.

There were Marxists in the Provos too, and while the Provos did develop a radical social and economic policy in the late 70s and early 80s they were never a decidedly Marxist force, like the Viet Cong for instance.

Today Sinn Féin have broadly accepted the principles of capitalism.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

barneyeile

Sand wrote: »

SF arent a run of the mill party. In most parties or organisations the phrase "they know where all the bodies are buried" is a metaphor, not the literal truth.

How very true!

anonymous_joe

Let's see, their ideals involve using force to achieve independance. Given that the people who were leading campaigns of terrorism oop North and across the water are still clearly major players in Sinn Féin, I'd prefer to pass.

If anyone who saw the debate before the last election in which McDowell rather easily wiped the floor with Gerry Adams, you'll realise that they lack the polish of Souther politicians. Furthermore, up North both the DUP and Sinn Féín have struggled to successfully govern. At the end of the day, both parties popularity stems from religious/nationalist perspectives - how would that work down South?

I recall they were quite against low corporation tax, etc, and were in favour of higher taxes for high income people, etc. Nothing that would be good for the economy of this country. I don't think a coalition partner would allow them to emasculate Irish business, especially given the global financial problems, so I doubt they'd stick to their ideals. Anyway, given how they were able to tell Americans they weren't Marxist in teh 80s while espousing it at home, married to the shall we say less than consistent evolution of their political values over the period of the Troubles I can safely say they've never been great at maintaining their ideals.

LordSutch

They Wont be in Power anyway, 'their ideals' stink, so the whole point of this Thread is erroneous.

Remember the heady days (Pre) the last election in the South, when some people were talking about the possability of Fianna Fail having to do a deal with the Shinners just to survive :rolleyes: When 'they' hoped for at least 15 seats :rolleyes: With Adams on the cusp of becoming the next President :rolleyes: with the total destruction of the SDLP up North too :rolleyes: and the fact that they might also eclipes the DUP . . .

In Reality 'if' Sinn Fein got more than four seats in the next Election it would be a miracle worthy of a 'Halo' appearing over the head of the 'Bearded One' - Fine Gael & Fianna Fail still wont touch them with a dirty stick anyway (and even that is after ten years decontamination)!

barneyeile

Camelot wrote: »

They Wont be in Power anyway, 'their ideals' stink, so the whole point of this Thread is erroneous.

Remember the heady days (Pre) the last election in the South, when some people were talking about the possability of Fianna Fail having to do a deal with the Shinners just to survive :rolleyes: When 'they' hoped for at least 15 seats :rolleyes: With Adams on the cusp of becoming the next President :rolleyes: with the total destruction of the SDLP up North too :rolleyes: and the fact that they might also eclipes the DUP . . .

In Reality 'if' Sinn Fein got more than four seats in the next Election it would be a miracle worthy of a 'Halo' appearing over the head of the 'Bearded One' - Fine Gael & Fianna Fail still wont touch them with a dirty stick anyway (and even that is after ten years decontamination)!

If any party in Leinster House ever went into government with Sinn Fein then they would be destroyed at the subsequent election. The vast majority of the electorate would be appalled. People tend to forget that Fianna Fail probably detest them the most since they have had to deal with them through the Good Friday Agreement! Fianna Fail and the DUP have more in common than you think!

lostexpectation

'Scenario for establishing a Socialist Republic' first published in An Phoblacht April 19th, 1980

lostexpectation

donegalfella seems to believe that sf and adams mean what they say, which is strange for him.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Nodin

All we need now is the Cruiser and we've the whole set....

Erin Go Brath

All the SF bashing and yet they've never had anyone before the tribunals, unlike say FF and FG. SF shouldn't touch those parties with a bargepole if they have any respect for themselves.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Erin Go Brath

SF have been reinventing themselves over the past few years, and have moved away from the bad old days of the provos, and embraced the peace process and the future. They probably need a new leader, a younger more dynamic type like Mary-Lou or Pearse Doherty to lead them.

SF will never be major players in the 26C, i agree. Their support hits a ceiling at about 10% and its hard to see them ever outpolling FF and FG in the 26C. It is quite possible with the dramatic drop in public support for FF, the recession, anti-lisbon sentiment, and other factors that SF could gain seats in the upcoming elections. If SF hold the balance of power, (and its very likely they will after some future General Election) then they suddenly become very revelant!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Erin Go Brath

The 6 counties are a different jurisdiction with many problems that don't exist in the 26C. SF are battling away with intransigent unionism to try and get a fair shout for the nationalist people, and Irish culture. FF, FG etc never had the balls to organise up there so its impossible to say if they would have fared any better than SF.

FTA69

donegalfella wrote: »

The point here is not to argue about who coined the actual term "socialism." Saint-Simonianism hasn't exactly left its mark on the Western world, has it? Marx has been socialism's primary exponent, redefining it within his revolutionary framework as a stage of transition between capitalism and communism. Socialism is thus part of Marxist theory.

Indeed, it is part of Marx's theory, but socialism itself isn't confined to Marx. By your logic the Labour Party are Marxists because they sit in the "Socialist" bloc in Europe.

Have you read Gerry Adams' 'Scenario for establishing a Socialist Republic'?

I'm not interested in what Adams set almost 20 years ago. Have you read aany of their recent policies? As I said, Sinn Féin was radical left back in the 80s, it most certainly isn't now. Talk has moved away from socialism and toward the vague "Ireland of Equals" slogan. Sinn Féin does not have a class analysis of Ireland at all, but rather is fundamentally a northern nationalist movement with a reformist view of the state.

So their "rhetorical" use of socialist tyrants such as Castro means "nothing at all" to you?

You seem to think that because they sell Guevara merchandise or pay lip service to Fidel Castro they're inherently Marxist. You are simply looking at meaningless rhetoric and symbolism as opposed to their actual policies. Holding up a picture of Castro or Connolly no more makes you a Marxist than standing at Bodenstown á la Fianna Fáil makes you a diehard Republican.

But again, it was Connolly who drew all the disparate strands together, wasn't it? I'm not arguing that Connolly originated the idea; but he became its prime exponent and theorist.

Connolly provided a Marxist analysis of what was always a trend within Republicanism. The fact was and is that his analysis was never undertaken by the wholesale Republican Movement or the Sinn Féin party. Éirigi and the IRSP are the only parties which would hold Connolly's ideas up as their ideological fulcrum.

So why do they repeatedly insist on a united socialist republic?

They don't anymore. They go on about an "Ireland of Equals", if anything they have diluted their former socialism in pursuit of middle-class respectability, the main reason why they are floundering today because they fell between two stools.

I've already asked you twice to provide me an example of Marxist policies within Sinn Féin today, each time you have failed to do so. Again I'll ask, where does Sinn Féin say it wants the industrial proletariat to overthrow the bourgeoisie and abolish private property. Because those two tenets are exactly what Marxism entails.

FTA69

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Let's see, their ideals involve using force to achieve independance.

Armed struggle was never an "ideal", it was a tactic, a way of realising an ideal.

Given that the people who were leading campaigns of terrorism oop North and across the water are still clearly major players in Sinn Féin, I'd prefer to pass.

So do you think that people shouldn't vote Labour because it contains former Official IRA members such as Pat Rabbitte and Pronsious De Rossa?

If anyone who saw the debate before the last election in which McDowell rather easily wiped the floor with Gerry Adams, you'll realise that they lack the polish of Souther politicians.

I wouldn't say they lack polish. Adams is a very effective debater on home ground, and I remember him battering Ruairi Quinn on a debate on social issues on the Late Late. The problem with the Sinn Féin leadership is that it is entirely northern (even Belfast) based and hasn't a clue about southern politics. It's entire onus is toward the north and the nationalist community which elects it there, hence they feel the south should be focussed on that too. This is why they'll start warbling on about all-Ireland agendas and the peace process to a southern electorate which couldn't give two f*cks about that sort of thing. The only time they surged was when they began providing radical leadership to working people in Ireland.

Furthermore, up North both the DUP and Sinn Féín have struggled to successfully govern. At the end of the day, both parties popularity stems from religious/nationalist perspectives - how would that work down South?

Hard community graft and the fact they were different to the rest of them worked wonders for them here.

I recall they were quite against low corporation tax, etc, and were in favour of higher taxes for high income people, etc.

You're somewhat behind with the times. Sinn Féin before the last general election stated they wouldn't raise corporation tax at all, or any tax for that matter. Which made them look like eejits when it was clear they couldn't pay for all the stuff they were promising. Gerry Adams even stood up in a chamber of commerce and said "Sinn Féin is a pro-business party".

Nothing that would be good for the economy of this country.

Well free-market capitalism isn't doing great by the world economy at the moment is it?

Anyway, given how they were able to tell Americans they weren't Marxist in teh 80s while espousing it at home, married to the shall we say less than consistent evolution of their political values over the period of the Troubles I can safely say they've never been great at maintaining their ideals.

I'll agree with you here, this problem is consistant with Irish Republicanism over the years, I have my own idea as to why this is the case.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Nodin

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Total cack and a complete misrepresenation.

SF Policy wrote:

As Ireland becomes a more multi-cultural country, the challenge is to embrace our growing diversity as a source of strength and opportunity. To do this we must begin by opposing racism, discrimination and intolerance of any kind wherever it occurs.

http://www.sinnfein.ie/policies/document/118

donegalfella wrote: »

where they have spent more time bickering and squabbling than they have attempting to govern.
.

(Completely unlike their unionist bretheren. Every day poor Willy Mc Crae crys a tear, because Gerry won't come for tea....)

Considering they were actively trying to bump each other off not too long ago, its a considerable improvement than hitherto.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.