|
 |
The Plough
Vol. 3- No 27
Monday 10th July 2006
E-mail newsletter of the
Irish Republican Socialist Party
1) Editorial
2) THE ROAD TO REVOLUTION IN IRELAND
Editorial.
On the IRSP web site, there is reference to a document Road to
Revolution and claims it is an internal IRSP document. That is an
unintentional mistake.
This article was first published in An Phoblacht in issues No. 3 Jan
1966, No. 4 March 1966, and in issue No.6 July 1966, under the name
Ger Collins and representing the views of the group Irish
Revolutionary Forces. This article, published in 1966, 50 years
after 1916, was based on Leninist revolutionary teachings as
interpreted to the Irish situation. It was also published in
pamphlet form.
The full selection of 14 issues of An Phoblacht is now with
Linenhall Library and along with the 6 issues of People’s Voice and
form an interesting study of the struggle against revisionism in
Ireland at the time.
Jim Lane, a former Chairman of the IRSP, former IRA Volunteer and
activist in the IRF, distributed this document among some members of
the IRSP as recommended reading mentioned it was produced by the
Marxist/Leninist group, Irish Revolutionary Forces in 1966. Jim Lane
was involved with its production along with the leadership (Sean
Daly, Brendan O’Neill, Gerry Higgins) and other members of the IRF
Organisation. It was an agreed document on how revolutionaries
should proceed in Ireland and it was to inform the thinking in the
years ahead of some comrades involved in the Republican struggle
right up to the time they became members of the Irish Socialist
Republican Movement, especially in the struggle for the primacy of
politics within that movement.
The document was part of the strong struggle by the IRF against the
pro-Moscow entryists to the Republican Movement. Those comrades and
political historians who are interested can view the 14 copies An
Phoblacht, the 6 copies of People’s Voice and The Road To Revolution
in Ireland in the following libraries; The Linenhall Library, The
National Library,
The UCG Library, Trinity Library, The Cork City Library, The Cork
County Library.
The Plough is re-publishing it here both in the interests of
historical accuracy and because of its relevancy still today. The
article reaffirms the importance of revolutionary theory. The
article raises important questions about stages of the revolution
which no doubt which will generate some debate. It emphasises the
importance of a revolutionary programme and while accepting that
tactics to implement that programme may vary the programmes itself
is of immense importance. It also poses questions about the
relationship between the party, the masses and the revolutionary
struggle itself. No doubt some of the soft left, ie those who fail
to identify with actual real existing revolutionary struggles such
as Cuba and Venezuela, Nepal, will find these questions
embarrassing. The article quiet correctly places the whole issue of
physical force in its proper context and makes no concessions to
pacifism. It reaffirms that in the final analysis the ruling class
will resist change with force.
THE ROAD TO REVOLUTION IN IRELAND
“Without a Revolutionary Theory there cannot be a Revolutionary
Movement”—Lenin
There are many in Ireland who flippantly disregard the great need
for a theoretical knowledge of revolution, by saying that it is
ACTION and not THEORY that is required. This sort of error is one,
which cannot avoid producing dire consequences.
A thorough understanding of revolutionary theory is indispensable to
the successful pursuance of revolutionary action. A revolutionary
activist can no more cope with the many and diverse problems of
revolution without revolutionary theory, than can an electrical
engineer master his problems without knowledge of electricity. The
question is as simple and straight forward as that.
REVOLUTION:
In terms of present conditions in Ireland: Revolution stands for the
total overthrow of that social, political and economic system which
functions in the country as a whole; and its replacement with an
entirely new order of things, more compatible to the needs of the
people, more beneficial to their progress and general welfare, and
designed to ensure the unqualified Independence of our Nation State.
From this it is obvious that the Irish Revolution must be a
two-phased effort. The first must be aimed primarily at the
overthrow of the Partitionist regime and the seizure of State power
by the revolutionary movement. The second must represent a
co-ordinated national effort during which the national community,
under the leadership of the revolutionary movement, will undertake
the reconstruction of the nation on completely new lines.
The most important thing to understand, and understand fully, is
that revolution not alone entails that period of national struggle
to free the country, but also encompasses an after period, to
implement the social, political and economic changes necessary to
give the newly acquired independency a durable substance.
Consequently, the revolutionary political organization which
mobilizes a popular support for the struggle against the present
regimes in Ireland, must, of necessity, retain the directorship of
national affairs after that struggle has been won, so as to ensure
that what the people fought for shall he realised.
To propose that the matter of national leadership could be arranged
in any other fashion is ridiculous. It is stupid, for example, to
say that when Ireland is liberated from its colonial yoke, and
re-united politically, a parliamentary election should be held to
elect a 32 County Parliament. What political interests are going to
compete with the party of the Revolution in such an election? Are
the old parties to be permitted to continue, even under different
names? Obviously, such a set-up, wherein the political opposition to
the revolution is allowed to retain its cohesiveness after the
revolution has won, cannot be entertained by any reasonable person.
Furthermore, it is highly absurd to suggest that new political
parties would come into being in the aftermath of victory. Where are
they going to come from? What interests are they going to represent?
It should be plain enough that all progressive groups in the country
are going to identify themselves with the revolution during the
colonial struggle, and as a consequence, they are going to become
part of the revolutionary political organisation. Anyone, any social
or economic interest which does not establish such an identity must
be opposed to the revolution. You cannot have neutrals in a
revolutionary struggle, and if it should happen that a segment of
the population did adopt a neutral position during the struggle,
then they have automatically forfeited the right to participate as
an independent political force in the State founded by the
Revolution.
The facts of the matter are: a modern revolutionary movement must
have a popular basis if it is to succeed. During the anti-colonial
struggle its organizational structure must facilitate a mass
mobilization of the community within the framework of the movement.
The desires of the people will therefore be expressed through the
revolutionary movement during the struggle. This is quite logical
and it is equally logical to say that the will of the national
community can be as beneficially expressed through the same medium
during the period of reconstruction that follows the anti-colonial
struggle.
In effect, a revolutionary government under these conditions would
be drawn from one political party. The State would function under a
system of Socialist Democracy wherein the various contradictions, or
legitimate conflicts of interests of the community, would be
represented in the Party, and would be resolved by the democratic
machinery of that party. The only interests which would not be
represented in, or recognized by the State, would be those
antagonistic to the interests of the community. This is the
revolutionary way. There is no other.
REVOLUTIONARY PROGRAMME:
When a revolutionary movement calls upon the people to rise in
active opposition to the status quo, it must base its case on
positive proposals of its own, as well as on the negative aspects of
the ruling regime. The people must be given a tangible reason why
they should overthrow the existing order in that they must be
presented with the prospects of an alternative system emerging from
their struggle, which will incorporate benefits not forthcoming
under the prevailing ruling clique.
Generally, it is the practice of revolutionary movements to issue a
social, political and economic programme, so as to enlighten the
community on its ultimate aims and ideals. This programme, with its
contents exemplifying the ideological motivation of the revolution,
represents the CORE of the struggle for freedom. By assessing its
contents against corresponding elements of the status quo, it is
possible to determine whether or not that CORE is sound or hallow;
whether or not the fight, even if successful, is going to be worth
the sacrifice and trouble it will inevitably incur. Does the
programme propose modifications to the existing system, or does it
involve the creation of a completely new and progressive order? That
is the main question. And an analysis of any programme will answer
this question, and by so doing, will make clear at once if its
contents are in fact revolutionary or not.
A truly revolutionary programme for Ireland must, of necessity, be
diametrically opposed to the existing order of things, this is only
logical, and since Ireland now functions according to the dictates
of capitalism, then, it is but common sense to suggest that an Irish
revolutionary movement must found its programme on the principles of
Revolutionary Socialism. There exists no other known alternative.
However, the realization of a revolutionary programme requires
planning, to take into account the resources of the revolution and
of the opposition to it, to select the means by which the revolution
advances, and to dictate the employment of revolutionary forces and
resources. Such diversified planning falls under the general heading
of policy.
REVOLUTIONARY POLICY:
A revolutionary policy represents an assessment of any given
situation, and the strategic and tactical plans adopted for the
employment of revolutionary forces and resources in that situation.
From this it can be seen that a fundamental difference exists
between the basis of a revolutionary programme, and the various
policies conceived to realise it. And it is precisely this
difference, by no means obscure or undefinable, that causes much
confusion in the appreciations of many Irish Revolutionaries.
A programme expresses the principles on which the revolution is
founded. To modify such a programme, or to pursue a course of action
antagonistic to its fulfillment, represents a positive violation of
PRINCIPLE. On the other hand, policies are dictated by prevailing
conditions - of necessity, they must change as conditions alter, or
when new opportunities emerge. The only principle governing policy
is the principle of compatibility with the ultimate realization of
the revolutionary programme it is designed to serve.
This somewhat brief outline should at least serve to illustrate a
great weakness among contemporary Irish Revolutionaries - that is,
the tendency to confuse policies for a programme, and therefore to
confuse principles with strategic and tactical expediencies.
An Irish revolutionary programme must be based on the destruction of
the neo-colonial system, and the construction of a new socialist
order. The employment of force to achieve this end is purely a
matter of policy, and for that matter, so is the participation, or
nonparticipation, in the arena of parliamentary politics.
However, experience, coupled with a pragmatic assessment of current
conditions in Ireland, points to the use of force as the only
realistic policy. And in this sense only is force complementary to
our principles.
On the other hand, should the unprecedented occur, wherein our
objectives could be gained without the use of force, and where the
use of force could indeed complicate, rather than complement, the
realization of a programme, then, under those particular
circumstances a policy of physical force would in fact be in direct
violation of our principles, since it would be antagonistic to the
realization of our programme.
Having established the role of policy in the overall framework of
revolution, it is necessary to proceed and sub-divide policy itself.
It has already been said that revolution in Ireland involves the
two-phased process of destruction and reconstruction, with both
dovetailed together to complement the ultimate realization of a
revolutionary programme. Now, since the revolution must be divided
into two distinct, though complementary, phases, the over-riding
trend in policy must be likewise influenced for maximum efficiency
and results. Consequently, to expedite explanations, the dominating
policy during the initial period can be classed as Power Policies
and those of the second period, Reconstruction Policies.
POWER POLICY:
It is pointless to talk on what should be done to save the country,
unless you are in the position to implement your proposals.
Therefore, having formulated its programme, an Irish revolutionary
movement must assess the situation, formulate plans for the
mobilization of support, and then commit its forces against the
status quo in a struggle for state power.
Power is the key to revolutionary success - unless a movement
succeeds in its struggle for state power its hopes, its aims, its
aspirations for a better and more equitable life for the nation’s
people amounts to nothing more than wishful thinking.
It is for this reason that the quest for power looms so large in
revolutionary appreciations during the initial stage of the
revolution. However, it is of equal importance that a revolutionary
leadership retains this quest for power in its proper perspective.
State power is itself but a means in the service of the revolution,
and is not an end in itself. For this reason, although all means can
in theory be justifiably employed by the revolution in its struggle
for power, in practice, limits are imposed by the necessity to
strenuously guard at all times against any venture or commitment
that would tend to compromise the status or functioning of the body
which is to symbolize state power once victory has been achieved.
It is natural then that although Power Policies must be dictated by
the need of doing what is necessary and what is possible to realize
power, at the same time, they must also be governed by the paramount
demand of avoiding any compromising action, even though such action
may hold the possibility of a quicker victory on the surface.
In other words, when Power Policy is being formulated at any given
point, its makers cannot isolate the range of their evaluations to
within the scope and demands of the particular revolutionary phase
they are engaged in. They must at all times look beyond that
juncture where State power is naturally required by the forces of
the revolution, and take into consideration the possibility of any
long sought participation in a course of action they contemplate
initiating, may have, or could possibly have, on the ultimate
revolutionary reconstruction of the nation.
A factor, which should perhaps be re-emphasized, is that bearing on
the employment of physical force. Force is an element, which can be
used in a variety of ways other than in its obvious form of military
action. However, we are not concerned here with any particular
policy governing its employment; more specifically, we are
interested in basic attitudes towards its employment.
Of necessity, a revolutionary movement must from the outset regulate
its policies on the premise that force will have to be used in the
struggle for power. Both precedent and ordinary common sense points
to the realism of this stand. On the other hand, while a
revolutionary movement must organize and prepare for the employment
of physical force, should it so happen that a unique opportunity
presents itself to facilitate the ascendancy of revolutionary forces
without its use, naturally the leadership will not turn it down. On
such an eventuality, policies can easily be realigned to avail of
the opportunity.
The important thing to bear in mind is that although it is
relatively simple for a revolutionary movement that has from the
beginning determined its progress on policies, which rely on the
employment of force, to re-adjust rapidly to exploit any opportunity
to acquire power by peaceful means. It is practically impossible for
a movement whose progress means to change its course with equal
success and speed, when it has been demonstrated that force offers
the only solution. The truth of this statement is substantiated over
and over in the pages of history - it is an uncontestable fact.
Consequently, the mood of a revolutionary movement must always be:
We are going to prepare for - and use - force to acquire our
objectives. However, should the enemy be so kind as to vacate the
field and allow the revolution to march forward without hindrance,
then we will naturally avail of the situation.
RECONSTRUCTION POLICY:
Basically, these policies are those formulated for the regulation of
the revolution’s advance once state power is in the hands of the
revolutionaries.
Policies governing the country’s reconstruction, along lines
compatible to the principles of Socialism, are of tremendous
importance. Indeed, there are many cases where the revolutionary
forces experienced success on the battlefield, only to lose their
way when it came to the implementation of the social, political and
economic changes that justified their existence in the first place.
So, when revolutionaries do acquire power, they must be constantly
on the alert against the emergence of any attitudes tending to
foster the reactionary notion that the job is now completed for all
practical purposes, or ideas that the revolution can afford to give
a little here and there without undue adverse effects. The job is
far from being done, and the revolution can no more afford to
compromise during the course of national reconstruction than it
could during the period of struggle against enemy forces.
In many respects it could be said that the period of national
reconstruction is one during which errors of policy more easily
occur than during the period of struggle against the forces of the
reactionary regime.
In reality, it is more correct to say that erroneous policies can
remain undetected for a greater time during the reconstruction
period than during the period of armed struggle where they develop
first, through a relaxation in revolutionary vigilance arising from
the mistaken though frequent notion that the revolution is a reality
once the struggle for power is won.
Secondly, due to the growth of arrogance in leadership circles which
can express itself in the shape of pursuing policies that the people
in general are not yet ready to accept, on the premise that the
leadership knows what is best for the people. This latter contention
may well be true. Nevertheless, the role of revolutionaries is not
to undertake the construction of a socialist state as their
exclusive responsibility, but, to guide the people in their
rebuilding of their own country.
The fundamental difference between a Socialist and a bourgeois
revolution is that while the latter represents a struggle for state
power in the interests of a particular minority class, the former
represents one for mass emancipation. As a result, although
bourgeois revolutionaries rely mainly on popular support for the
winning of their revolution, once they have that power in their
hands they invariably proceed to arrange things in the interests of
their class; disregarding the interests of the masses when such
interests conflict with their own.
The great bourgeois cry of “LIBERTY, EQUALITY, FRATERNITY” takes
into account only the bourgeoisie - it has never yet been known to
include the “Lower Orders”, as they style the working classes. To
the bourgeois revolutionary, “the people” is a very abstract phrase
indeed, but to the Revolutionary Socialist it is an entirely
different matter. The Socialist revolutionary is of the people and
for the people in the fullest sense of the term, and should he ever
forget this, and put himself on the path of a bureaucrat, ordering
the people around, you can be sure that there is one revolution on
the road to ruin.
State power, in the hands of a revolutionary leadership, must only
be used to forward the revolution, by doing what is necessary in a
tempo regulated by what is possible at any given time. A
revolutionary leadership cannot, through the employment of the
revolutionary movement backed by the might of state power, proceed
to construct the new society by decree, completely disregarding the
attitudes and voice of the mass of the people, and at the same time
expect to realise in the end that concept of society envisioned by
the philosophy of Revolutionary Socialism.
For success in reconstruction, a strict equilibrium must at all
times be maintained between the revolutionary leadership, the
revolutionary movement and the mass of the people. In a word,
socialist reconstruction represents a co-operative endeavor between
the leadership, the movement and the mass of the people, and in this
undertaking state power is merely a tool to be used just like any
other, and not a whip with which to drive the people towards their
salvation.
The socialist reconstruction of a country represents the labours of
its people to build a society, which is to the advantage of all.
However, the structure that ultimately emerges in any given country
can only reflect the amount of labour which has been devoted to its
building. No people can expect such a blessing as a gift, no
revolutionary movement and its leadership can say to the people
“give us your support in our struggle for state power, and we will
give you a socialist state in which all will enjoy benefits hitherto
undreamed of.”
No! If such a state is to be created, then the people themselves
must build it, the revolutionary leadership and the movement can
only instruct, direct and co-ordinate its creation. It is of the
utmost importance that revolutionaries grasp this fact from the
beginning, and that they keep it in mind when they are formulating
policy at any given time. And it is for this reason also that the
danger of isolating considerations for any given policy, to within
the limits of immediate demands, has been stressed throughout.
It may, for example, appear smart politics to make all sorts of
promises when you are appealing for support to wage a struggle for
power. But what happens when power is actually yours, and you find
yourself in the inevitable position of not being able to pay up? You
can, of course, use your newly acquired power to keep the people in
line - you can also use state power to coerce the people into the
building of that order of things you promised would be realized so
readily and so painlessly. But what the end result of this course
would be is difficult to say.
It is obvious that at this stage it is impractical to extend our
discussion on the basis of proposing specific policies to meet the
needs of our own particular situation in Ireland. We must, of
necessity, limit the discourse: (l) to illustrating the role of
policy in the revolutionary process as a whole, so as to clearly
define its proper function; (2) to establishing some basic tenets
which govern the formulating of policy, especially some points that
may easily be overlooked by students in their study of revolutionary
techniques.
The great need is to demonstrate, over and over, that this business
of revolution cannot be reduced to such relatively simple terms, a
learning how to use a gun, and then taking off to take a shot at a
target e.g., the “B” Specials or the likes - Revolution represents
political action under the most demanding of conditions, it is a
haven neither for fools, rogues or adventurers.
Again, let it be remembered that the profession of a revolutionary
is not merely related to the correct leadership of a people in their
struggle for freedom, but also to correct leadership during that
period when the people must work, and work hard, to give a durable
substance to their new-found status.
So far, an attempt has been made to identify the significance of a
Revolutionary Programme. This was followed by an examination of
Revolutionary Policy, wherein it was demonstrated that policy is
essentially an instrument by which a given programme is realised.
The next link in the chain is Revolutionary Action, which, in turn,
can be viewed as the instrument of policy.
REVOLUTIONARY ACTION:
It is not our desire to examine the various categories of
revolutionary action, but rather to place such action as a whole in
proper perspective to the other elements of revolution, which
influence and dictate its direction and content.
In essence, Revolutionary Action constitutes any act or combination
of acts designed to complement the realisation of a given
revolutionary policy. From this it can be seen clearly that action
undertaken by an organisation is not revolutionary by virtue of its
own content, but through its relationship to policy.
It is necessary to grasp clearly the underlying significance of this
interrelationship between Action, Policy and Programme if one is to
appreciate fully what revolution really entails. All too frequently,
the idea is held in Ireland that military action against the
occupational regime is revolutionary policy, on the strength of its
manifest aggressiveness towards the enemy.
This is a mistaken and highly dangerous notion, because regardless
of how warlike an anti-occupational campaign may be, it is not its
military content as such which determines it’s revolutionary status,
but the policies it is designed to complement.
A few illustrations may assist in presenting more clearly what we
are trying to establish. Take our own situation. It will be conceded
that a revolution in Ireland must entail not alone the political
reunification of the nation, but also the social and economic
reconstruction of the country as a whole. As a result, to be
revolutionary, any organisation which presently professes hostility
to the partitionist regimes must, first, present a programme based
on these aims; second, formulate policies which correlate the
realisation of this programme both to prevailing conditions and the
organisations capabilities; and finally, engage in a sequence of
activity designed to implement the policies.
In such a context, any activity engaged in is revolutionary action,
regardless of whether or not it is military in form.
On the other hand, as an example of military action, which is not
necessarily revolutionary, we can take the I.R.A. campaign started
in 1956. In this instance, there existed no programme that we know
of. And for that matter neither did the Republican Movement of the
day regulate its aims according to a series of co-ordinated
policies. Consequently, it is difficult to determine what the I.R.A.
was actually fighting to establish as an alternative to what it was
trying to destroy. It is utterly stupid to claim the I.R.A. was
fighting for Irish freedom and let it go at that. Of itself, the
term “freedom” is far too vague to mean anything - it must be
qualified by social, political and economic commitment in order to
have a positive form. Lacking such commitment the campaign in the
Six Counties was, in every sense, negative, and the military
activity, which ensued, was therefore non-revolutionary.
As a matter of historical accuracy it should perhaps be mentioned
that the I.R.A. leadership of 1933 issued one of the very few
revolutionary programmes that has ever emanated from an Irish
revolutionary movement. That the men of that time failed to achieve
their goals does not detract from their position - at least they
presented a coherent programme, and conceived policies to realise
it. Their failure lay, in part at least, in the realm of their
policies.
Another example which differs in form but whose end result is
similar is to be found among some organisations of the “left”. Here
we have organisations, some of which, present programmes that are
essentially revolutionary. However, the policies conceived to
realise them bear no relationship whatever to revolutionary demands,
and, as a consequence, all action these organisations undertake is
unavoidably reactionary.
The foregoing examples should at least show that revolutionary
action is a constituent part of a binary formula, whose elements of
programme, policy and action must at all times complement each
other. When any conflict develops between these elements, then the
entity loses its revolutionary standing to a degree determined by
the extent of the contradiction.
Irish republicans have a tendency to ignore the theory of
revolution, and instead view revolution solely in terms of action
against the enemy. Unfortunately, this has the unavoidable result of
endowing their activities with a certain negative quality - that is
to say, their actions are determined more by what they oppose than
by what they propose to create in its place.
The result of this negative position is at least partly obscured by
the fact that any armed action against the colonial regime is bound
to produce some good, in as much that at least it serves as a
counter-force to the oppressive force of the enemy.
However, the fact to be grasped is that we can no longer restrict
our interpretation of revolution to mere military action against the
British in the North-East, and at the same time expect a wide
response from the people. If we are ever to gain a mass basis for
our efforts, then we can only hope to do so when we place such
military action in proper perspective.
That is, when we can demonstrate to the people that such action is
necessary and vital to the implementation of policies, which, in
turn, relate to a social, political and economic programme that
offers the people at large positive prospect of a better way of
life.
This pertinent fact must surely be apparent to all by now. And the
primary lesson to be learned from it is that the old approach to
revolution, wherein Republicans could rally a mass support for their
efforts without the necessity of committing themselves to a social
and economic programme of revolutionary proportions, no longer
applies.
The call for action to free the country no longer receives the
response of old. The question is now asked, either consciously or
subconsciously, “What do you propose to free us from?” And the only
way that query can be answered is by the presentation of a
programme.
The factors touched on are elementary, and yet, unless they are
understood, unless the fundamentals of the simple formula that has
been demonstrated is thoroughly grasped, it is difficult to
appreciate how the more complex problems created by a revolution in
motion could ever be mastered.
Irishmen have never shown a reluctance to fight against their
enemies. But with all our fighting over the past two centuries, the
results to date are meagre by any standards. Surely, therefore, this
should tend to demonstrate that revolution entails more than a
willingness for combat. This does not mean, of course, that physical
force is an unimportant factor in revolution. Far from it.
However, to have revolutionary potential, to possess the capability
to deliver an adequate return for the demands it makes, physical
force must be subordinate to the directives of policies, which, in
their turn, must be subservient to social, political and economic
objects conceived to better the people’s welfare.
End item.
Catalan Solidarity: Ireland Committee
Catalan Solidarity: Ireland Committee was established to provide
practical support and solidarity to Catalan political prisoners,
their supporters as well as information on the continuing struggle
for self determination and socialism in Catalonia to challenge the
media portrayal on political militants that are being fuelled by a
regime, its media, its paramilitary forces, and mounting repressive
laws and legislations.
In order to assist these goals we have established an online news
and information service to comment on the current political
situation within Catalonia, from within the prisons and on the
streets.
As part of our work we aim to provide information events, pickets
and solidarity protests etc to highlight various campaigns and
activities and to raise awareness of the political situation in
Catalonia.
We urge both Catalans living in Ireland and other non-Catalans
across Ireland to write to Catalan Political Prisoners, offering
them both continued solidarity and support.
We intend to issue regular news, comments & activities via email by
Llibertat! ˆ Saoirse!
At present our website is under construction however, we hope that
our work will inspire you to find out more!
www.catalansolidarity.org <http://www.catalansolidarity.org/>
SUBSCRIPTION DETAILS
Llibertat! ˆ Saoirse!
E-news service of the Catalan Solidarity: Ireland Committee
To obtain this regular eservice Llibertat! ˆ Saoirse!, forward
„SUBSCRIBE‰ to the following e-mail: catalansolidarity@hotmail.com <mailto:catalansolidarity@hotmail.com>
Please feel free to comment
on the contents of the Plough. We welcome political comments and
criticisms.
If you would prefer to
receive the Plough as an attachment please e-mail with heading “add
attachment”
If you know of anybody who
might wish to receive the Plough please send his or her e-mail
address to
Johnmartinps@eircom.net
or john.martinps@virgin.net
If you wish to receive back
copies of the “The Plough” Please e-mail” to
johnmartinps@eircom.net or
john.martinps@virgin.net tating which numbers you wish.
To unsubscribe to the
Plough please send e-mail entitled “unsubscribe” to johnmartinps@eircom.net
or john.martinps@virgin.net
It is the policy of the
Plough to acknowledge information and articles from other sources.
The Republican Socialist
Youth Movement have re-launched their website.
It can be viewed at
www.rsym.org
An Glór / The Voice
News sheet of Belfast
Republican Socialist Youth Movement
January 2007
Circulation: 400
- Brit police never
acceptable
- Maghaberry Prison protest
continues
- Assets Recovery Agency, a
question of money
- Support the Turkish death
fast
- Ard Fheis rejects any
move towards INLA decommissioning
- Volunteer Davy McNutt
RIP
http://www.rsym.org/pdf/magazines/anGlor1.pdf
The Republican Socialist
Youth Movement have produced a short video on the situation
concerning Shannon airport and its continued use by American troops
and the CIA. The video can be viewed at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH0WqJb95l8
Subscribe to the bi-monthly
“The Starry Plough/An Camchéachta”
P.O. Box 1981, Derry, BT48
8GX, Ireland.
THE VOICE OF REPUBLICAN
SOCIALISM!
E-mail plough@irsm.org
The Starry Plough
http://irsm.org/irsp/starryplough
IRSP: Pairtí Poblachtach
Sóisialach na h-Éireann
http://irsm.org/
James Connolly Society
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly/
James Connolly Archive
http://www.marxists.org/archive/connolly
The Republican Socialist
Forum from Derry IRSP is
http://rsmforum.proboards23.com/index.cgi
Republican Socialist Online
Merchandise - Website
A website that offers a
central place to go on the Internet to find good quality items with
a distinct Republican Socialist theme. Proceeds from sales from this
effort go towards the IRSM and it’s various projects.
http://www.angelfire.com/folk/irishshop/index.html
Donate to the IRSP:
Standing Order Form |
