[Marxism] SSP not inviting the IRSP...

James Daly james.irldaly at ntlworld.com
Fri Apr 9 06:22:12 MDT 2004


Donal a chara

"... the British problem in this country..."?

By the way, for the PUP/UVF "this country" is "Ulster" (all six
counties of it). That was the position of the Stalinist party to which
Paul Cockshott belonged, the now defunct British and Irish Communist
Organisation (BICO), which held there was an Irish Protestant nation,
which was entitled to its national territory, the six counties of
Northeast Ulster. (Its leaders have now gone on to form the Ernest
Bevin society, named after the 1945 Labour Cabinet member who declared
about British nuclear armament "I will not go naked into the
conference chamber"). Another member was the execrable Bill Warren,
whose thesis was that imperialism is progressive. Unfortunately, the
New Left Review's influential Tom Nairn also adopted the BICO
position. I am sure Conor Cruise O'Brien also was influenced by it. It
seems to have influenced the SSP as well.

If Sinn Fein could be invited along with the PUP/UVF, could that be
because in practice if not in theory the acceptance of Stormont is
compatible with the two nation position? The conflict resolution
approach to the "Ulster" problem requires Sinn Fein to put itself on
the level of the UVF and the UDA as "paramilitaries". It also requires
Sinn Fein to decommission and become "democratic", ignoring the fact
that the partition of Ireland which set up the six counties as a
political unit was brought about by the very real conspiracy and
imminent threat of civil war, the conspirators being supported by top
echelons of the British Army, which mutinied against the Liberal
government, and refused to stop the the running of guns and ammunition
from Germany. The "internationalised" conflict resolution "federalist"
approach of the former leadership of Sinn Fein led them to give most
strict orders that PROs were never to refer to a United Ireland, but
were to refer to a United Ulster or a Greater Ulster.

You didn't answer my earlier point about the grand old Duke of York.
What good are numbers (whose feet are heard again in your latest post)
if they're going in the wrong direction? How can an election in which
Sinn Fein gets more votes than the SDLP be considered a success (as
was claimed by Sinn Fein), when it brings Paisley's irredentist and
exclusionist party, as a popular reward for its defiance of the peace
process, to the dominant position in Stormont? (It also cost the PUP
its seat -- does that mean that party can't go to the next SSP
conference?)

James Daly

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "DoC" <donaloc at hotmail.com>
To: <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2004 11:30 AM
Subject: [Marxism] SSP not inviting the IRSP...


> Whilst I'm obviously against any suggestions that a serious
socialist
> could avoid or ignore the British problem in this country, perhaps
the
> fact that the SSP didn't invite the Irps or the swimmies is because
they
> are micro-groups in comparison with Sinn Fein.
>
> They obviously invited the social-imperialist PUP because they have
one
> elected representative and because they wanted to be seen as 'even
> handed' in their treatment of the occupied Six Counties.
>
> Is mise
> DoC
>
> _______________________________________________
> Marxism mailing list
> Marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu
> http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism
>






More information about the Marxism mailing list