Date: Thu, 19 Jun 1997 14:24:39 -0400
From: malecki-AT-algonet.se (Robert Malecki)
Subject: Re: M-I: Sinn Fein & Defeatism (more)


Gary writes;
>
>Now to support the IRA or not?  Most people would seem to be in agreement
>that yes we should.  Karl though does not appear to think much of the armed
>struggle the IRA have put up.  I myself am a middle aged academic and am
>consequently somewhat reluctant to issue from this office denunciations of
>the fighting capacity of the IRA.  But Karl seems untroubled about such
>matters.

Well I think both Karl and Gary are wrong on this. The point being that the 
IRA is substituting "armed" struggle for class struggle is the real problem 
here. Despite some of the both brave and heroic actions of some of these 
fighters the fundemental problem is that they deny the historical 
revolutionary motor of history the working class. Not saying in regards to 
the defending their homes and living and working places from Loyalist 
attacks that they do have the right to defend themselves. But trying to take 
on British Imperialism by small groups of men and women is in fact a utopian 
pipedream.

>
>Next the question of Sinn Fein.  Their leader Adams describes himself in
>his book as a socialist.  He does not however give any idea what that term
>means for him.  Though he is plainly working class and does refer to the
>struggles of the working class and also mentions betrayals by union
>leaders.  But Matt, Karl, and Robert seem happy with the epithet "petty
>bourgeois" for Sinn Fein even though an empirical analysis of their support
>would reveal that their support base is very working class. 

Just because a person claims to be socialist and talks about workers does 
not make the Sinn Fein a workers party. In fact there program is not a 
working class program but a bougeois nationalist program to "unite" all 
chatholics against the protestants and British occupation of Northern 
Ireland. The fundemental line for the nationalists in Ireland is Orange 
against green or vice versa and not class against class..This is the real 
problem with Irish nationalism.

>
>I put that in not to suggest that we should confuse the base of a political
>party with its trajectory but merely to suggest that we should perhaps be a
>little cautious about throwing the epithet "petty bourgeois" around.

Well OK I can understand this. But even in the reformist workers parties we 
have a petty bougeois leadership who acts as a reformist broker between the 
capitalist class and the working class. These days they are moving towards 
becoming bougeois parties along the lines of the democratic party in 
America. But back to the Sinn Fein and characterizing them as " Petty 
bougeois" one could also say that there are real "bougeois" elements also 
who support them. But the point is that they base there struggle not on the 
Irish Proletariat but alien class forces and institutions like the chatholic 
church in order to build a "free" Ireland. In fact fundementally there is no 
real difference in the IRA and the Narodniks of their time.
And in fact conditions for proletarian revolution in Ireland and Englend are 
at least over ripe over a workers revolution.

I think the discussions that Lenin and Trotsky had on the Polish 
Nationalists and also the Jews in the "bund" who wanted to build a special 
organisation to fight for there own "national" historic interests might be 
of interest in regards to this discussion. But also the discussion on the 
Narodniks. 
>
>On the list the consensus is "not one iota of support for Sinn Fein".  They
>are, it would seem, anathema.  The more subtly inclined might ask if they
>are anathema to the Left why are they also anathema to the British who
>refuse to let them into the current round of peace talks?

No! This is wrong. In fact the real point is not one bit of "political" 
support to these people. Because they have a program which does not 
represent the historic interests of the Irish Proletariat. But this does not 
mean that communists don't take sides. We are for the military victory of 
the IRA against the British occupation troops. And we critically support and 
defend every action that they might take against the British army. While at 
the same time point out that the IRA can not by itself beat the British 
ruling class and its army. It will take the entire proletariat of both 
Ireland and England to do that. At the same time we recognize the right of 
the Irish to build their own nation if the British working class and its 
Bolshevik Party were to seize power.
>
>Matt is more direct here and I will answer him directly as well.  He asks
>if I think that the increased electoral support for Sinn Fein will further
>the interests of the working class.  Behind this question lie the long ears
>of the purist Marxist donkey.  Well my response here is to say to hell with
>the purist formula ridden dogmatic sectarianism of so much of organised
>Marxism.  The answer is "yes."  

I don't think so. Unfortunately the bottom line of Nationalism is always 
unfortunately to reverse the forms of repression rather then to remove them 
through Proletarian revolution. Communists in all cases see the national 
question especially in Ireland only being solved through a workers 
revolution. That is a very fundemental difference and just saying i support 
the IRA and Sinn Fein on principle is wrong because the Sinn Fein do not 
represent the interests of the Irish Proletariat..
>
>Given the present situation in Ireland a resurgence of Sinn Fein would be
>politically progressive especially if it draws in the young unemployed and
>links them up to a revolutionary tradition.  And it is this "revolutionary
>tradition" that my glib friends are forgetting about entirely when they
>loftily scorn Sinn Fein as "petty bourgeois". 

No it will unfortunately be a new generation that will be wasted if your 
wishes were to come true Gary. A new round of communal wars based on 
religion rather then any serious kind of class struggle. 
>
>Let me ask some questions of my own.  What was so petty bourgeois or
>"so-called" about the resistance of the Irish hunger strikers?  When Bobby
>Sands on his death bed stood for parliament as a Sinn Fein Candidate did that 
>make him petty bourgeois" and did it further mean that we could not support
>him one iota? And let me finish by asking another one of Matt.  Does he
>believe that the defeat of Sinn Fein would advance the cause of the Irish
>Working class and if so how? 

No, a hunger strike does not make a person petty bougeois. But the thrust of 
his actions and his support of nationalism does. Just as my adventurist 
actions back in the Vietnam days were petty bougeois because they were not 
based on any kind of serious program for organizing the proletariat for its 
historal role. Nor is the nationalism in Ireland in any way progressive! In 
fact both sides program is to wipe out the other side. That is if the 
nationalist have there way. Fundementally "petty bougeois" in this sense is 
sometimes heroic adventurist actions connected to substituting oneself and a 
small group of people to alien class forces other then the proletariat in 
the struggle for real freedom.

Warm regards
Bob Malecki

By the way Gary could you write a little more about what is going on in 
Australia. I find it extremely interesting..



     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---