Sligo RSM New Blogspot

EuskalHerria

The Republican Socialist Movement are proud to announce the setting up of a new Blogspot for Sligo. The Blog aims to have updates on local issues and recent statements from the movement. It is also going to be part of a new initiative to educate and interest the people of Sligo in republican socialist politics as the movement looks to become active in Sligo.

The blog has links to educational Republican Socialist documents, the national IRSM website and news feeds from local newspapers and radio stations to keep subscribers up to date with local news.

It also has contact details for people to get in contact to ask any questions about the movement, joining or general queries they may have.

The address is http://rsymsligo.blogspot.com/ please check it out and subscribe to the rss feed for updates.

bobcar61

No interest to me but it's a good idea and worth getting it out there as I'm sure it's interest to someone.
Thanks for the linky:)

starbelgrade

Republican Socialism? I thought Sinn Fein had that area pretty much covered. And as for the idea of a united Ireland - surely that boat has long since sailed?

starbelgrade

starbelgrade wrote: »

Republican Socialism? I thought Sinn Fein had that area pretty much covered. And as for the idea of a united Ireland - surely that boat has long since sailed?

I still can't get my head around a theoretic society that includes yet dis-includes at the same time. It's a concept that seems socialist, but also smells of facism.

Dublin taxi driverism?

That's about the height of it.

EuskalHerria

starbelgrade wrote: »

Republican Socialism? I thought Sinn Fein had that area pretty much covered. And as for the idea of a united Ireland - surely that boat has long since sailed?

While sinn fein are very active and hard workers in working class areas on a local level, there are ideological differences on a national level that we would disagree with. There also over the last number of years been issues that may raise doubts over sinn feins socialism.

Can I ask why you think the idea of a united Ireland has sailed?

EuskalHerria

starbelgrade wrote: »

I still can't get my head around a theoretic society that includes yet dis-includes at the same time. It's a concept that seems socialist, but also smells of facism.

Dublin taxi driverism?

That's about the height of it.

I don't know how you are going from socialism to fascism to be honest chara.

garth-marenghi

starbelgrade wrote: »

Republican Socialism? I thought Sinn Fein had that area pretty much covered. quote]

My understanding is that there are some people out there who would question whether Sinn Fein could be thought of as either Republican or Socialist. With their participation in the Stormont Government, Policing Boards etc it is perhaps seen as a climbdown from their original Republican principles.
With regards to been Socialist ,and I open to correction on this, but werent Sinn Fein involved in implementing Private Finance Initiatives (privitisation?) in the Health Service in the North while Barbara De Bruin was in that government department?. On a local level in Sligo did Sinn Fein vote for bin charges and enter a mayoral pact with Fianna Fail?. I would guess that these might have an impact on their Socialist credentials.

Again I wouldnt be personally interested in the RSM but good luck with it

guinnessdrinker

Euskal, have the IRSP got much of a memebership in Sligo and are they considering running a candidate in the local elections?

I do think there is a place for a socialist party in the county because at the moment there reallly isn't one that I can think of. I wouldn't regard Sinn Fein as a true socialist party. I used to attend SWP meetings when I was in college but lost interest in them after a while and I'm not sure if they even have a presence in Sligo now. Good look with the site though.

EuskalHerria

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

Euskal, have the IRSP got much of a memebership in Sligo and are they considering running a candidate in the local elections?

I do think there is a place for a socialist party in the county because at the moment there reallly isn't one that I can think of. I wouldn't regard Sinn Fein as a true socialist party. I used to attend SWP meetings when I was in college but lost interest in them after a while and I'm not sure if they even have a presence in Sligo now. Good look with the site though.

We currently have a few members. We have been involved with local issues and now we are formally launching the movement in Sligo. Hopefully over the coming weeks there will be more of an advertisement of the party, with initiatives to educate the people of Sligo on the politics of the movement while also getting more involved with local issues.

We won't have anyone running this year, although in the future who knows. We just want to get the movement up and running in the county, crawl before we walk and all that.

darealtulip

EuskalHerria wrote: »

I don't know how you are going from socialism to fascism to be honest chara.

now I don't have a opinion in Irish politics, but I think that the nazi's said they were socialists (National socialists) and to be honest I thought that sinn fein was right wing because of all the talk about nationalist and republican (a long time ago though, when I was young and Ireland was far away!).

For outsiders like me it is confusing sometimes to see where every one stands. For some reason I always see the claim on territory as right wing. Maybe because that's what happend near us or we learned in history about it like that I don't know.

Anyway it's not my discussion and I'm not impling that you are right wing! Just wanted to say that for us (ignorant non nationals;)) it's sometimes confusing on first sight.

EuskalHerria

darealtulip wrote: »

now I don't have a opinion in Irish politics, but I think that the nazi's said they were socialists (National socialists) and to be honest I thought that sinn fein was right wing because of all the talk about nationalist and republican (a long time ago though, when I was young and Ireland was far away!)

Firstly, national liberation must not be confused with pure nationalism and we must understand what nationalism is. The nationalism of an oppressed country differs vastly from the nationalism of a country whose role is oppressive, i.e., a developed country which oppresses other nations.

For instance, the Nationalism of the National Front and Tories in Britain is oppressive and anti-working class, as was the nationalism of the Fascists in Germany and Italy in the 30's and 40's. On the other hand the nationalism expressed in Ireland today like that in African and Latin American countries is progressive because it seeks to dismantle a system of government that is based on exploitation and corruption.

This is an extract from an IRSP document entitled "What is national liberation?" which can be read here http://irsm.org/history/whatisnatlib.html

CSC

Surprised at any republican group having links with Declan Bree. Is he not disliked by most republicans in the Sligo and Leitrim area for standing against Joe McDonnell in the 1981 elections despite being actively involved in H Block support groups before that?

darealtulip

EuskalHerria wrote: »

Firstly, national liberation must not be confused with pure nationalism and we must understand what nationalism is. The nationalism of an oppressed country differs vastly from the nationalism of a country whose role is oppressive, i.e., a developed country which oppresses other nations.

For instance, the Nationalism of the National Front and Tories in Britain is oppressive and anti-working class, as was the nationalism of the Fascists in Germany and Italy in the 30's and 40's. On the other hand the nationalism expressed in Ireland today like that in African and Latin American countries is progressive because it seeks to dismantle a system of government that is based on exploitation and corruption.

This is an extract from an IRSP document entitled "What is national liberation?" which can be read here http://irsm.org/history/whatisnatlib.html

I do understand that now, but understand our confusion as outsiders, specialy when nationalism and socialism are mentioned in one breath. Thanks for the link but it is really not my discussion. I have absolutely no side or history in this and really don't have a opinion on these issues.

starbelgrade

EuskalHerria wrote: »

Can I ask why you think the idea of a united Ireland has sailed?

Because we already voted against it - you could always try the Brian Cowen method of forcing people to vote until they get it right, but then where does democracy come into it?

The North is what it is - neither Irish nor British, but a mix of both. The sooner everyone up north accepts that & moves on, then it will be a lot better place to live in. I suspect that this will take a few generations though.

To me the idea of a "United Ireland" is about as relevant to today's politics as Jason Donovan is to today's music.

CSC

starbelgrade wrote: »

Because we already voted against it - you could always try the Brian Cowen method of forcing people to vote until they get it right, but then where does democracy come into it?

The North is what it is - neither Irish nor British, but a mix of both. The sooner everyone up north accepts that & moves on, then it will be a lot better place to live in. I suspect that this will take a few generations though.

To me the idea of a "United Ireland" is about as relevant to today's politics as Jason Donovan is to today's music.

When did we vote against a united Ireland?

EuskalHerria

CSC wrote: »

Surprised at any republican group having links with Declan Bree. Is he not disliked by most republicans in the Sligo and Leitrim area for standing against Joe McDonnell in the 1981 elections despite being actively involved in H Block support groups before that?

Declan is a very committed and hard working socialist who has served the county very well for many years. I can't comment on the situation you have mentioned as it was personally before my time, the fact he works very well with other local republicans is testament to the fact that any ill feelings about such a situation, have long been forgotten.

EuskalHerria

starbelgrade wrote: »

Because we already voted against it - you could always try the Brian Cowen method of forcing people to vote until they get it right, but then where does democracy come into it?

The North is what it is - neither Irish nor British, but a mix of both. The sooner everyone up north accepts that & moves on, then it will be a lot better place to live in. I suspect that this will take a few generations though.

To me the idea of a "United Ireland" is about as relevant to today's politics as Jason Donovan is to today's music.

There was a vote as part of accepting the Good Friday Agreement, that the "republic" of Ireland must give up any claim to the north that was in the constitution.

The RSM are against the GFA. Personally I ask how democratic was the vote on the GFA? The people of the south and north were basically voting for peace, and with war fatigue people were inevitably going to vote for anything they believed would stop the violence. The GFA was not the end of republicansim but I think that it is a stumbling block.

CSC

EuskalHerria wrote: »

Declan is a very committed and hard working socialist who has served the county very well for many years. I can't comment on the situation you have mentioned as it was personally before my time, the fact he works very well with other local republicans is testament to the fact that any ill feelings about such a situation, have long been forgotten.

I'm not a republican or involved in party politics in Sligo but from speaking to peope through the years I believe there to be a lot of bitterness regarding the issue and doubt it has been forgotten.

EuskalHerria

CSC wrote: »

I'm not a republican or involved in party politics in Sligo but from speaking to peope through the years I believe there to be a lot of bitterness regarding the issue and doubt it has been forgotten.

Perhaps a few individuals are bitter towards Declan over this, his actions and efforts for Sligo over the last number of years have spoken volumes for him therefore I would hope that any bitterness, although I have never heard of any towards him persoanlly, would be left in the past.

SligoBrewer

I would like to think of myself as a socialist, however, Norn Iron? Meh.

Wester

EuskalHerria wrote: »

Personally I ask how democratic was the vote on the GFA? The people of the south and north were basically voting for peace, and with war fatigue people were inevitably going to vote for anything they believed would stop the violence.

Well, how democratic was the vote on the GFA? Please enlighten us. And just who exactly was voting out of war fatigue, given that the vast majority of people, North and South, were not "at war" in the first instance?

garth-marenghi

Wester wrote: »

Well, how democratic was the vote on the GFA? Please enlighten us. And just who exactly was voting out of war fatigue, given that the vast majority of people, North and South, were not "at war" in the first instance?

I think the general point is that the majority of Irish people were tired of the cycle of violence been perpetuated by both sides (i.e suffering from a type of war fatigue) and any agreement which brought about the potential for peace was more than likely going to be ratified.

I do empathise with those who opposed the GFA with regards to the giving up of the territorial claim on the North (especially considering the nature of British imperialism in the country). The argument would probably be that it is part of the process of conflict resolution where major ideological compromises have to be made in pursuit of some kind of peace.

Maybe an idea for a debate between the IRSP and SF in Sligo on the prospects of a United Ireland in the future.

starbelgrade

One of the main provisions of the Good Friday Agreement was the abolition of the Republic of Ireland's territorial claim to Northern Ireland via the modification of Articles 2 and 3 of its constitution. As a result, the territorial claim which had subsisted since 29 December 1937 was dropped on 2 December 1999.

That was the day the republican dream of a United Ireland ended. And it ended by a majority vote, despite the hopes of the Republicans. We as a country decided that enough was enough, so to be harping on about it 10 years after the fact is completely pointless.

There are much more relevant political issues to be involved in.

starbelgrade

garth-marenghi wrote: »

Maybe an idea for a debate between the IRSP and SF in Sligo on the prospects of a United Ireland in the future.

Yawn. I have to say that I have voted Sinn Fein in the past - not for their reublican beliefs, but when I started voting, they were about the only party who had election policies that actually meant something to me. After the Good Friday Agreement was signed & got a "yes" vote from me, though, I have to say that I find their continuing dream of something that was never, and will never happen, more than a bit boring.

EuskalHerria

starbelgrade wrote: »

Yawn. I have to say that I have voted Sinn Fein in the past - not for their reublican beliefs, but when I started voting, they were about the only party who had election policies that actually meant something to me. After the Good Friday Agreement was signed & got a "yes" vote from me, though, I have to say that I find their continuing dream of something that was never, and will never happen, more than a bit boring.

I don't think this thread has much for you chara:p

As for the dream of a united Ireland being long gone merely because of the GFA? I don't think that is true. In the current economic climate it must be asked what is the true root of the problem i.e the capitalist system which perpetuates class inequality and has done for decades. Its all good and well talking about socialist politics but the point of the RSM setting uop in Sligo is to make it relevant to this county and to offer an alternative to the working class in sligo.

EuskalHerria

SligoBrewer wrote: »

I would like to think of myself as a socialist, however, Norn Iron? Meh.

How can you strive or hope for a socialist Ireland when part of the Island is still occupied by a capitalist imperialist force? The yearning for a socialist Ireland cannot be seperated from the goal of a united Ireland.

darealtulip

EuskalHerria wrote: »

How can you strive or hope for a socialist Ireland when part of the Island is still occupied by a capitalist imperialist force? The yearning for a socialist Ireland cannot be seperated from the goal of a united Ireland.

Why not? As an outsider I really don't understand this statement. Does socialistm has to be world domination? Why could Ireland not be socialist without the North? Again I'm an outsider and don't have anything to do with the issue of the North. But this sounds a bit strange to me.

Do you see yourself as a part of Europe or not? (last question out of interest and nothing to do with the first one)

And were do you stand on religion? (again just out of interest)

gino85

darealtulip wrote: »

And were do you stand on religion? (again just out of interest)

religion and politics should never be mixed but thats just my opinion

guinnessdrinker

starbelgrade wrote: »

One of the main provisions of the Good Friday Agreement was the abolition of the Republic of Ireland's territorial claim to Northern Ireland via the modification of Articles 2 and 3 of its constitution. As a result, the territorial claim which had subsisted since 29 December 1937 was dropped on 2 December 1999.

That was the day the republican dream of a United Ireland ended. And it ended by a majority vote, despite the hopes of the Republicans. We as a country decided that enough was enough, so to be harping on about it 10 years after the fact is completely pointless.

Starbelgrade, the old articles 2 and 3 were meaningless and were never acted on or going to be acted on and they only served to antagonise and cause mistrust of the south by people from a unionist background.

The new articles 2 and 3 guarantee Irish citizenship for anyone that wants to claim it in the North. It also allows for the reunification of Ireland if/when the majority of the people want it. So the idea that the dream of a united Ireland has ended is not the case at all.

We as a country did decide that we had seen enough violence but as far as I know every polictial party in the Dail as well the SDLP and SF in the North still desires a United Ireland through peacefull means.

darealtulip

gino85 wrote: »

religion and politics should never be mixed but thats just my opinion

Couldn't agree more! That's why I was asking.

I'm just following this discussion with interest and would like to know a bit more.

For us with a dutch back ground it feels something like wanting Flanders back with Holland. We think all party's should want that before it happens. I'm not saying it is but with the very simplistic view we have about it this is the way I was and maybe am looking at it. Again it is not my discussion and have no opinion in the matter, just try to understand all sides.

starbelgrade

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

The new articles 2 and 3 guarantee Irish citizenship for anyone that wants to claim it in the North. It also allows for the reunification of Ireland if/when the majority of the people want it. So the idea that the dream of a united Ireland has ended is not the case at all.

That may be so, but my point is, is that the North is essentially neither Irish or British, but a mix of both countries people, politics & religions. Regardless of what passports they carry, both sides are from Northern Ireland.

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

We as a country did decide that we had seen enough violence but as far as I know every polictial party in the Dail as well the SDLP and SF in the North still desires a United Ireland through peacefull means.

I don't think that the Greens have any nationalist policies.

starbelgrade

EuskalHerria wrote: »

How can you strive or hope for a socialist Ireland when part of the Island is still occupied by a capitalist imperialist force? The yearning for a socialist Ireland cannot be seperated from the goal of a united Ireland.

That's the most ridiculous statement I've read in a long time. How do you suggest we do this... "kick the brits out"?

guinnessdrinker

starbelgrade wrote: »

That may be so, but my point is, is that the North is essentially neither Irish or British, but a mix of both countries people, politics & religions. Regardless of what passports they carry, both sides are from Northern Ireland.

I think I see where you are coming from SB but when you said that the idea of united Ireland was finished when we as a country voted to ammend articles 2 and 3, my point was that this was not the case at all because basically the old articles 2 and 3 were counter productive.

EuskalHerria

starbelgrade wrote: »

That's the most ridiculous statement I've read in a long time. How do you suggest we do this... "kick the brits out"?

How is that a ridiculous statement? How can there be a socialist Ireland when there is an imperialist force on the island protecting the interests of capitalism?

EuskalHerria

darealtulip wrote: »

Why not? As an outsider I really don't understand this statement. Does socialistm has to be world domination? Why could Ireland not be socialist without the North? Again I'm an outsider and don't have anything to do with the issue of the North. But this sounds a bit strange to me.

Do you see yourself as a part of Europe or not? (last question out of interest and nothing to do with the first one)

And were do you stand on religion? (again just out of interest)

To strive for a socialist Ireland while acknoledging partition in Ireland is impossible. As I just replied, there cannot be a socialist Ireland while there is an imperialst force in Ireland that is protecting the interest of capitalism.

My opinion on religion is a personal one as it should be. There is no party position on it if thats what you are asking and I would hope that no party would have a postion on religion. Personally politics and religion should overlap as little as possible. For me persoanlly this is not an issue as I am agnositc.

starbelgrade

guinnessdrinker wrote: »

I think I see where you are coming from SB but when you said that the idea of united Ireland was finished when we as a country voted to ammend articles 2 and 3, my point was that this was not the case at all because basically the old articles 2 and 3 were counter productive.

Fair enough!

starbelgrade

EuskalHerria wrote: »

To strive for a socialist Ireland while acknoledging partition in Ireland is impossible. As I just replied, there cannot be a socialist Ireland while there is an imperialst force in Ireland that is protecting the interest of capitalism.

And exactly how do you expect this to change? You can't simply kick out the Unionists - they were born in the North & have as much right to live there & voice their opinions as everyone else. You can't turn back time & re-write the history books.

darealtulip

EuskalHerria wrote: »

To strive for a socialist Ireland while acknoledging partition in Ireland is impossible. As I just replied, there cannot be a socialist Ireland while there is an imperialst force in Ireland that is protecting the interest of capitalism.

My opinion on religion is a personal one as it should be. There is no party position on it if thats what you are asking and I would hope that no party would have a postion on religion. Personally politics and religion should overlap as little as possible. For me persoanlly this is not an issue as I am agnositc.

Thanks, I ment party politics on religion.

But does it not imply that if you can't have a Ireland with part of it socialist and part not, you can't have a socialist Ireland if the rest of Europe is not? Not picking a argument just don't understand why that bit of territory is so important to a socialist believe.

Where do you stand on Europe then (party again)? Thanks again for explaining.

starbelgrade

darealtulip wrote: »

Thanks, I ment party politics on religion.

But does it not imply that if you can't have a Ireland with part of it socialist and part not, you can't have a socialist Ireland if the rest of Europe is not? Not picking a argument just don't understand why that bit of territory is so important to a socialist believe.

Ireland can have whatever political system it wants, if the people elect for it... it does matter if it's conservatism, socialism, or capitalism or whatever.

The same applies to the North. It is an absurd statement to say that there could not be a socialist government in the south whilst there is "an imperialst force in Ireland that is protecting the interest of capitalism".

It's absolute guff.

And state control has very little to do with liberty. Just look at Cuba.

EuskalHerria

starbelgrade wrote: »

And exactly how do you expect this to change? You can't simply kick out the Unionists - they were born in the North & have as much right to live there & voice their opinions as everyone else. You can't turn back time & re-write the history books.

I think you have many misguided views on republican socialism. We need to engage with the unionist working class and realise that the old ways of tribalism and reactionary politics have failed. There has been much work done by the RSM in the north to engage with unionist and while not giving them any falsehoods about our politics and wanting a socialist republic, trying while engaging with them to show the benifits of a socialist republic.

Essentially republican socialism aims to unite the working class, regardless of being unionist or nationalist and show them the benifits of social equality within a socialism.

darealtulip

I still don't get why you have to include the North in your socialist believes. Why is a piece of land so important to your socialist believe? Why not Europe then? I really don't understand what a ideoligy has to do with territory.

I really try to understand your point of view. Why can you not (when or if you get elected) have a socialist state upto the border? Or why stop by the North?

sorry to ask over and over again.I am an outsider and probaly don't understand something about this but I really would like to know this.

EuskalHerria

darealtulip wrote: »

Thanks, I ment party politics on religion.

But does it not imply that if you can't have a Ireland with part of it socialist and part not, you can't have a socialist Ireland if the rest of Europe is not? Not picking a argument just don't understand why that bit of territory is so important to a socialist believe.

Where do you stand on Europe then (party again)? Thanks again for explaining.

I see what you are saying. The aim of introducing a socialist system is obviously something that is a global issue as it is an alternative to the system of exploitation that exists today. Ultimately though while there may be solidarity with many groups internationally, the focus must surely be at home. My personal view on Europe and globally is that there are groups that should rightly focus on developing the idea of socialism in their respective country while obviously maintaining that international solidarity for the global development of socialism. This is all personal opinion of course.

The reason that the issue of the north is so important is because the British simple, have no and have never had any claim to the north. Unlike what starbelgrade has said it is not merely an issue of "kicking the Brits out" or "moving the unionists" off the land they have lived on for 800 years. Republican socialism aims to have unionists converted into realising that their is one common enemy in the capitalist system that is exploiting both the unionist and nationalist working classes.

darealtulip

I do understand a bit about the brits etc since my wife scottish. What if they were a independent state like scotland wants to be (well some of them anyway)?

Would that be a option in your opinion or does it have to be 1 state/republic?

Thanks for trying to explain anyway. Lots of questions and no opinion, sorry!

starbelgrade

EuskalHerria wrote: »

The reason that the issue of the north is so important is because the British simple, have no and have never had any claim to the north. Unlike what starbelgrade has said it is not merely an issue of "kicking the Brits out" or "moving the unionists" off the land they have lived on for 800 years. Republican socialism aims to have unionists converted into realising that their is one common enemy in the capitalist system that is exploiting both the unionist and nationalist working classes.

Why do the 6 counties HAVE to be part of this revolution?

starbelgrade

darealtulip wrote: »

Thanks for trying to explain anyway. Lots of questions and no opinion, sorry!

Questions are as much needed as answers.

EuskalHerria

starbelgrade wrote: »

Why do the 6 counties HAVE to be part of this revolution?

Why should it be excluded? Explain to me what claim britain has on Irish soil?

EuskalHerria

darealtulip wrote: »

I do understand a bit about the brits etc since my wife scottish. What if they were a independent state like scotland wants to be (well some of them anyway)?

Would that be a option in your opinion or does it have to be 1 state/republic?

Thanks for trying to explain anyway. Lots of questions and no opinion, sorry!

In a way that is a bit more relative to our beloved dutchy:D Imagine if the Germans had invaded Holland and Rotterdam was then claimed as german soil because of plantation and settlement that occured over hundreds of years, would you feel that rotterdam is part of Holland or Germany?

starbelgrade

EuskalHerria wrote: »

Why should it be excluded? Explain to me what claim britain has on Irish soil?

None. I've just torn up the history books.

EuskalHerria

starbelgrade wrote: »

None. I've just torn up the history books.

If they were printed by folens then its a good start. Did you know that the original founder of folens books and printing press was a Nazi who fled to Ireland?

Look chara I am not on here to do the impossible of recruiting you, the thread was to highlight our new blog and the thread has completely deviated away from that. If there are any more similar questions please start another thread and direct me towards it and I will happily answer any questions you have.

(after saturday i'm afraid as I am beginning the long journey to cork for the Rovers game friday, tommorow and won't be near the t-internet):)

darealtulip

EuskalHerria wrote: »

In a way that is a bit more relative to our beloved dutchy:D Imagine if the Germans had invaded Holland and Rotterdam was then claimed as german soil because of plantation and settlement that occured over hundreds of years, would you feel that rotterdam is part of Holland or Germany?

As a matter of fact it happend the other way about, the germans lost soil to france and belgium (the ones I know for sure). Our history is different because we had more invaders and were invaders ourself. We had Spain, France and Germany invading our territory.

As you say it is more relative to us. I do understand (thanks to scottish wife and friends) that the brits invaded these parts. What I still don't understand why it needs to be united with the republic, could a independend state not be a solution? As you see the dutchness roots deep in me (compromise is key in the lowlands!):D

Ps good for some to go to Cork! I'm waiting for a baby to come so no away matches for me:(

darealtulip

starbelgrade wrote: »

Questions are as much needed as answers.

Thanks. As I said before it is hard for us to comprohend. We are a nation of compromise and there are not many people in the Netherlands claiming land etc. Maybe only for an independent Rotterdam!:D