|
THE NCMLU REPLIES
Dear Comrade,
We are sorry that you found our brief statement 'IRELAND: THE WAY FORWARD' 'disappointing'.
We reply to this criticism below.
Sinn Fein's Current Tactics
You criticise the article concerned on the grounds that it
". . . fails to offer any Marxist-Leninist strategy, as opposed to extremely Short-term tactics, in relation to the 'Irish Question' ".
(Your letter. para. 1).
This is undoubtedly true.
But the purpose of the article was not to put forward a Marxist-Leninist strategy for Ireland, but merely to deal with one tactical question -- namely, the view put forward by some organisations and individuals who call themselves 'Marxist-Leninist' that Sinn Fein's present policy of pursuing political in place of armed struggle represents 'a betrayal of the Irish national liberation struggle'.
However, you yourself accept this point when you say:
"I do not assert that the change in Provisional Sinn Fein's tactics was 'a betrayal of the Irish people's struggle for national liberation' ". (Your letter: para. 4).
There appears, therefore, to be no disagreement between us on the basic question of our statement, and it appears to us that your criticism that the statement deals with only
" . . . extremely short-term tactics" (Your letter: p. 1).
is inappropriate, since the statement was not intended to anything more.
However, you say that we present
" . . . NO EVIDENCE" (Your letter: para. 3)
for the statement made in the article that
"THE SITUATION IN NORTHERN IRELAND HAS QUALITATVELY CHANGED SINCE IRELAND WAS PARTITIONED IN DECEMBER 1921 INTO THE NEO-COLO&Y OF THE (THEN) FREE STATE AND THE COLONY OF NORTHERN IRELAND",
(NCMLU: 'Ireland - The Way Forward', in: 'International Marxist-Leninist Review'. Volume 2, No. 1 (Spring, 2000), p. 61).
In fact, however, the NCMLU statement goes on to give some evidence of the changed situation of British imperialism in recent years compared with that of 1921:
"Then, the British Empire was still in existence and British imperialism was a world power. Then, the colonial status of Northern Ireland could be maintained with acceptable stability by according preferential status to the Protestant community".
(NCMLU: 'Ireland: The Way Forward' in: 'International Marxist-Leninist Review'. Volume 2, No. 1 (Spring, 2000); p. 61).
Indeed, we would maintain that the mere acceptance by the British imperialists of the 'Good Friday Agreement' of April 1998 is sufficient to demonstrate the changed situation and policy of British imperialism in relation to Ireland. Other examples are:
the establishment of the power-sharing 'Northern Ireland Assembly' (April 1998);
('Keesing's Record of World Events', Volume 44; p. 42,207).
the holding of the referendum on the 'Good Friday Agreement' (the first All-Ireland ballot since 1918) , in which 71% of the people in the North and 94% of those in the Republic voted yes':(May 1998);
('Keesing's Record of World Events', Volume 44; p. 42,288).
the election of a Northern Ireland Assembly (June 1998);
('Keesing's Record of World Events', Volume 44; p. 42,347).
the re-routing of provocative Orange marches away from sensitive predominantly nationalist areas (June 1998);
('Keesing's Record of World Events'. Volume 44; p. 42,347).
the Northern Ireland Assembly agreement on the formation of a power sharing executive and cross-border bodies (December 1998);
'Keesing's Record of World Events' Volume 44; p. 42,684).
the Patten Report on the reform of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) recommending a change of name, oath and symbol to transform it into a police force more acceptable to the
Nationalist community (September 1999);
'Keesing's Record of Wand Events'. Volume 44; p. 42,161).
the formation of the power-sharing Northern Ireland Cabinet (November 1999);
Keesing 's Record of World Events', volume 45; p. 43,271).
the first meeting of the North-South Ministerial Council (December 1999);
('Keesing's Record of World Events'. Volume 45; p.43.332).
We feel that the above facts alone are sufficient to demonstrate the correctness of the NCMLU statement that there has been in recent years a qualitative change in British imperialism's policy towards Ireland.
Northern Ireland!
We note that in your quotations from the NCMLU statement you add 'sic' or an exclamation mark to references in the statement to 'Northern Ireland', presumably to express sarcastic criticism of our use of the term.
But the fact that we speak of 'Northern Ireland' in no way implies support for the partition of Ireland. In fact, the Committee has made it plain that we fully support the liberation and unification of Ireland.
Nevertheless, the partition of Ireland is at present a fact, and it assists in no way the unification of Ireland to pretend that it does not. With respect, therefore, we suggest that your apparent sarcasm on this question is misplaced.
Sinn Fein and Republicanism
You suggest that
"Sinn Fein representatives have virtually abandoned Republican in favour of Nationalist ideology". (Your letter: para. 2).
But in fact the aim of Arthur GRIFFITH (1872-1922), who
" . . . founded Sinn Fein"
('Encyclopedia Americana'. Volume 13; New York; 1977; p. 492), (meaning 'Ourselves Alone') was
" . . . to create a dual monarchy with Britain, like that of Austria-Hungary". ('Encyclopedia Americana', Volume 13; New York;
1977; p. 492).
It was the Irish members of the House of Commons, meeting as the 'Dail Eireann' (Assembly of Ireland), who, in 1919,
" . . . went beyond Griffith's plan . . - and declared for a republic".
('New Encyclopaedia Britannica', Volume 5; Chicago; 1994; p. 497).
We feel, therefore, that it is incorrect to present Sinn Fein as 'moving away from Republicanism towards Nationalism' , and we would use the terms 'Nationalist and 'Republican' as interchangeable. But distinguishing them from such terms as 'Unionist', signifying one who supports continued union with Britain.
Sinn Fein and Socialism
You say :
"When was the last time anyone heard other than ritual lip-service to socialism or a democratic socialist republic, from the Republican leadership? (Your letter: para. 2).
This passage in your letter appears to imply that Sinn Fein was formerly socialist in its political orientation, but is so no longer.
Put in fact Sinn Fein has never been a Marxist-Leninist, and therefore has never been a genuine socialist, party. It is a Nationalist Party, and therefore if and when its members talk of socialism this has no scientific meaning.
One must agree with the 'Campaign for Labour Representation in Northern Ireland' when it says:
The IRA/Sinn Fein is a Nationalist organisation with a fluctuating social policy. Its social policy, whether Socialist, Corporate Statist or capitalist, is today what it has always been -- an optional extra. Nationalism is what it is essentially about".
(Campaign for Labour Representation in Ireland.' 'Is Sinn Fein Socialist?'; Belfast; 1987; p. 3).
and that its social policy has been inconsistent and unprincipled, certainly not socialist:
"In the early 1930s Sinn Fein . . . was implementing the 'Socialistic' tactic. In the early 1940s it was in active alliance with Nazi Germany. In the 50s It was into the Catholic Corporate Statism of the period and the Cold War struggle against atheistic Communism. In the 60s it was back with Socialism again".
(Campaign for Labour Representation in Northern Ireland: ibid.; p. 3).
Marxist-Leninists understand that the revolutionary process in colonial-type countries such as Ireland embraces two stages:
firstly, the stage of national-democratic revolution and only then the stage of socialist revolution. In the words of the Programme of the Communist International, in colonial-type countries, the transition to socialism is, as a rule, possible
" . . . only as the outcome of an entire period of transformation of the bourgeois-democratic into the socialist revolution. . . . bourgeois-democratic revolution, consistently pursued, will be transformed into the proletarian revolution in those colonies and semi-colonies where the proletariat acts as leader and exercises hegemony over the movement".
(Programme of the Communist International. in.- Jane Degras (Ed.): The Communist International:19l9-1943.. Documents', Volume2; London, 1971; p. 506, 507).
Marxism-Leninism maintains that in the second, socialist stage of the revolutionary process in a colonial-type country,
" . . . the proletariat pushes aside the national bourgeoisie, consolidates its hegemony and assumes the lead of the vast masses of working people in town and country, in order to overcome the resistance of the national bourgeoisie. secure the complete victory of the bourgeois-democratic revolution, and then gradually convert it into a socialist revolution". (Josef V. Stalin: 'Questions of the Chinese Revolution', in: 'Works' Volume 9; Moscow; 1954; p. 225).
To maintain that socialists should characterise the present, national-democratic stage of the Irish revolution as 'socialist' would be a pseudo-leftist mistake. The President of Sinn Fein, Gerry Adams (b. 1948) expresses the correct view in his book 'The Politics of Irish Freedom when he says:
"The republican struggle should not at this stage style itself 'socialist republicanism'. That would imply that there is no place in it for non-socialists". (Gerry Adams: 'The Politics of Irish Freedom'; Dingle (Eire);1986; p. 132).
Conclusion
In conclusion, we thank you for your letter and ask you to accept our warm fraternal greetings.
|
|
