|
There
are those within the Irish left who contend that there
does not exist justification for the use of physical
force in the struggle for a socialist society. And
there are those who are not of the left who because
of the horrors that they have witnessed during recent
decades in Ireland are now strong opponents of a paramilitary
campaign in the pursuit of national liberation and
self-determination.
But as one who desires the establishment of a socialist
republic in Ireland, which I believe can only become
a reality within the context of national liberation
and self-determination, does one really believe that
socialism can evolve and will evolve peacefully? If
I could really believe that I would be a very happy
person for I detest violence in all its forms. But
inspite of my detestation, I believe that in the pursuit
of national unity and socialism, physical force will
become an ingredient at sometime or other. In a sense
this would be creative violence for the common good
and on behalf of justice as distinct from destructive
violence.
Take the pursuit of Irish freedom for example: the
presence of a British military reality has always
been used to thwart the realisation of such a just
objective, i.e., that Ireland should be ruled and
managed by the Irish themselves.
And just as Britain used genocide at the time of the
Plantations to maintain her illegal presence in Ireland,
she now uses the descendants of the Planters to continue
that presence. Presenting to the world the image that
she is the peacemaker in Ireland between warring religious
factions. The Provisionals helped to cement this image
when upon their need to curry votes from nationalists
and Catholics as part of their sell-out strategy,
they set up area groups against the unwanted Orange
triumphalist marches. A blatant use, some have said,
of sectarianism in the pursuit of political power.
The Belfast Agreement for example is another (sophisticated,
I would say) thwarting of the continual just demand
for national unity. One of the biggest con tricks
was carried out upon the people of the island via
an illegal referendum, illegal because Britain —
against the will of the majority — is illegally
present in Ireland, and it was they who mainly organised
the referendum that affirmed partition and the British
presence via the so-called 'consent principle'. The
consent principle is copper-fastened by the fact that
a unionist minority claims to be 'the British presence'
and therefore requires the support of 'their army
and administration' — an army, which in response
to that required support, supplied the loyalist killer
gangs with weapons for the sole purpose of killing
nationalists and Catholics in order to prevent unity.
When Patrick Pearse coined the truth that 'Ireland
unfree shall never be at peace' he was being prophetic
for he knew that without justice in the Irish context
— the Irish ruling themselves — there would
never be an authentic peace in Ireland.
The concept of peace, however, had to be manipulated
and twisted by the architects of the Belfast Agreement,
for to face sincerely and truthfully the basis of
peace i.e., justice, would logically have led to the
British agreeing to withdrawal and the descendants
of the planters accepting that they were a minority.
And in such a democracy, a minority would have had
to accept the will of the majority whilst maintaining
the freedom to influence thought and action against
the prevailing majority consensus.
It is precisely this manipulation designed to maintain
the status quo that contains within it the truth which,
contrary to the statements of many, Britain is still
interested in remaining in Ireland if only in 6 of
our 32 counties. (A good hold of the head however
stifles the rest of the body.)
Thus, British military and administrative intransigence
is the stranglehold that generates reactive violence
in order to remove the hold in the name of, and in
the necessity of, freedom. Pearse's grasp of, and
insight into, this reality is paramount.
Now that which generates guerilla warfare is also
the basis for the failure of socialists in attempts
to create a united working class in the occupied 6
counties. For the creation of the latter would sound
the death knell of British rule in Ireland —
which the British establishment do not want, and in
spite of their protestations to the contrary, still
use the Orange card in a more subtle and sophisticated
manner.
As I have stated or implied elsewhere, the unity of
the working class people pertaining to a socialist
society in Ireland cannot be realised while the British
presence prevails. The national question has to be
settled first; although parallel with the pursuit
of the latter, an effective socialist propaganda campaign
must be active.
Furthermore, the unity of the working class without
a revolutionary strategy as distinct from a constitutional
one, is doomed to failure because of the inevitable
evolution of a trade union mentality that inevitably
becomes and is part of the status quo. Since when
have we heard those alleged socialists who are prominent
in the Irish Congress of Trade Unions speak of the
need for national unity or a Socialist Republic?
In the event of national unity the pursuit of justice
must still continue. In the new context, however,
justice would be the people owning and controlling
the means of production, distribution and exchange;
not a minority as it is in the south of Ireland at
present. Again I question can anyone imagine this
minority letting go of their power and privilege in
the name of justice? James Connolly foresaw such a
minority in a free Ireland and knew that they would
defend their position by all means available to them:
that is why he told us to hold on to our weapons in
the event of achieving national freedom.
Index: Current Articles + Latest News and Views + Book Reviews +
Letters + Archives
|
