Reply from Brian Cahill

[Xxxx Xxxxxx <xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Forwarded on behalf of Brain Cahill:

Domhnall said:

> I return to work on Monday and get to lock horns
> (again) with Cahill. (Oh great).

Nice to see you again, too.

> Unfortunately, working class unity has little
> meaning in areas where the two
> sides won't even speak.

No argument there. Socialists in the North are faced
with a very difficult situation, and they can either
take the rather difficult path of trying to build
unity amongst the workers of two hostile groups or
they can side with one group (regardless of the class
forces involved) against the other. The Socialist
Party is attempting, with very little influence to
take the former route. Sinn Fein, by contrast seeks to
unite all Catholics against the British and the
Protestants. They have certainly had vastly more
success with this tactic, by their own lights. The
rest of us, though, are left to wonder if striving to
increase the sectarian polarisation of the North is a
particularly progressive idea.

> There can be no meaningful unity with
> Fascists - which is what Loyalists are.

The PUP/UVF? The UDA/UDP? Their voters? The DUP?
*Their* voters? Where exactly are you drawing this
"fascist" line?

> Ordinary working-class Protestants, of whatever
> persuasion, yes, we would love to broaden our
> contacts with them (and we are).

This is laughable. Quite understandably, ordinary
working class Protestants, the majority of the
Northern working class, loathe your party. And
"Republican Movement" massacres of Protestant workers
like that carried out at Kingsmill are only part of
the reason.

> But we must be realistic (something that the SPI
> could never be) true unity of action will take time
> and, from a dialectical viewpoint, will only be
> accomplished if our class interests lie in the same
> direction. At present, many Working Class Unionists
> receive a preferential position under British rule,
> lower unemployment rates, better housing, etc;

Your restatement of the eternal verities of left
republicanism is flawed on two grounds.

Firstly, the existence of "a preferential position" in
terms of "lower unemployment rates, better housing
etc" would not give Protestant workers different
fundamental class interests, any more than such
differentials render white workers in America
inherently reactionary. This should be fairly basic
stuff.

Secondly, the present existence of a significant
preferential position for Protestant workers in the
North is highly dubious. The people screaming abuse at
parents and schoolchildren on the Ardoyne (to use an
extreme example you may like) are not richer than the
people they are abusing. In fact, the old industries
which once did give many Protestant workers an
employment advantage have been all but wiped out. In
terms of housing, the idea that Protestant workers now
have access to better housing than their Catholic
neighbours would be laughable if it wasn't so
earnestly repeated by republican propagandists.


> particularly in regard of the 'rights of the
> [Fascist] Orangemen' to march
> down poor 'Nationalist' enclaves

You seem to be remarkably fond of the word "fascist".
It leads to some rather serious inconsistencies in
your position though. If the Orangemen are indeed
fascist, shouldn't all of their marches be opposed,
those through Catholic minority areas as well as
Catholic majority areas? Why does Gerry Adams go to
such length to say that Sinn Fein is not opposed to
Orange marches in Catholic minority areas? Why do the
(Sinn Fein backed) Catholic residents groups seek to
negotiate with Orangemen?

In fact, if their really is an organised fascist body
with the tens of thousands of members which the Orange
Order has, (not to mention all those other "Loyalist
fascists" you mentioned earlier) shouldn't opposing
this huge menace at all costs be the immediate task of
progressive forces in Ireland?

The answer is rather simple. The Orange Order is
unpleasant and deeply reactionary. It is not, however,
fascist. Further, Sinn Fein's approach of whipping up
sectarian tensions around Orange marches has the
direct effect of shoring up the support and membership
of the Order.

> I recently was reading Lenin, I can't remember
> exactly where - I'm sure that my more knowledgeable
> friends will be able to find a suitable quote. He
> said that contrary to what was being put out by so-
> called leftists, the task of
> completing bourgeois democracy [in Russia] was the
> task of the working class.

Which is very interesting, but unless you are
suggesting that the Bolshevik revolution was carried
out with the goal of establishing bourgeois democracy
in Russia, hardly very pertinent.



> I guess Connolly, too, only claimed to be a
> socialist.

What are you talking about?

> For me, the task in hand is help in building up a
> wide and large enough social movement to remove the
> Brits and carry us forward (progressively) beyond
> the era of reunification.

A "wide and large enough social movement" which will
exclude the majority of the Northern working class,
but include the Catholic rich doesn't sound like a
particularly laudable goal.

> In the meantime, we will do as much as we can to
> push for progressive policies, but let's face
> it there's not a whole lot we can do. I'm sure that
> Brian will come in with his stuff on term time
> workers, PFI - I will answer these as before - but
we
> are not free.

Your "labour must wait" politics are being made ever
more explicit.

For those of you who don't know what Domhnall means by
my "stuff on term time workers and PFI", I will indeed
"come in" on the issues.

Sinn Fein ministers in the Stormont government have
had very few serious departmental decisions to make
which have involved more than simple administration.
When they have had decisions to make, they have
consistently and viciously implememted anti-working
class politics.

Most spectacularly, they are helping to introduce
(despite purely formal opposition to the policy) the
British government's Private Finance Initiative (PFI).
In other words the Sinn Fein minsters for Health and
Education are helping to privatise Irish schools and
hospitals.

Meanwhile, Martin McGuinness, SF minister for
education, fought bitterly against the term time
workers in the biggest and most important labour
dispute in Northern Ireland for years.

Not to mention their Derry councillors hardly covering
themselves in glory when it came to their position on
the building of a large factory by Raytheon, the
international arms dealers.

Meanwhile, in the South, Sinn Fein voted for the
imposition of anti-working class Refuse taxes in
Sligo. As if to prove that it wasn't an abberation
they followed that move up by voting to increase them
the next year. In the Dublin Corporation area, two of
their councillors (as predicted by anti-refuse tax
campaigners) managed to not show up to the vital vote.
The two of their councillors who did show up voted
against publically recording the votes of councillors.

Despite the proclamations of Domhnall and other left
apologists, Sinn Fein has a record of voting for or
implementing anti-working class policies whenever they
have held any kind of office.


> 'Labour must wait' has been the slogan of every
> apologist for British terror this century

Is this lie here only for rhetorical effect, or is it
a genuine attempt to mislead?


> In my view, some Unionists will not 'fall neatly
> into line', they will continue to be used as foot-
> soldiers for British Imperialism after the
> re-unification of the country.

How many do you think *will* fall neatly into line?

> However, it is my experience that sections of the
> upper-working class and the middle-class Unionist
> population are becoming fast attuned with their own
> Irishness

Interesting that you seem to think that this is the
case while still under British rule.

>> The Protestants are allowed no agency of their own.
>> In fact, the majority of the Northern working class
>> barely exist for the authors of this kind of
schema.

> I recognise no borders separating the working class
> and I certainly recognise agency within the classes
> in the Unionist community, see above for an example.

You deny that they can have any progressive role or
outlook until after the unification of Ireland.

>> Everything boils down to a dispute between
Catholics
>> (who must fight for "some kind of bourgeois
>> all-Ireland democracy") and the British.The
>> Protestants have no role to play. For that matter,
>> the only role Catholic workers are to play is to
>> fight for the perceived interests of the Catholic
>> rich.

> I never even mentioned Catholicism, you did that.

No you used the term "nationalist", which is near
synonymous with "Catholic" in Northern Ireland. You
can use any terminology you like, your view remains
the same. Everything boils down to a dispute between
the Catholics \ nationalists (fighting for some kind
of all Ireland bourgeois democracy) and the British.
Protestants (or the "unionist communisty") have no
role to play.

> As to the last line, it is scandalous that such
> tripe could be written.

You are arguing that the Catholic \ nationalist
section of the working class has to fight for an all
Ireland bourgeois democracy. In other words, they have
to carry out what is supposed to be the role of the
Irish nationalist (ie Catholic) bourgeoisie, right?

[snip abuse of the Socialist Party]

Surely you can do better than that?

Is mise le meas,
Brian Cahill

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com

=======
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message