Racism

Um, no surely as its Gregory Campbell and he'd say he lives in and 'represents' 'Londonderry' that'd be about right

But seriously it was a pasted article written by one Claire Weir not obviously the long dead James Connolly.

And if we're gonna have the Derry or Londonderry argument every time someone says it the 'wrong' way there isn't much point is there? Maybe light-hearted right now but it will get needlessly tedious and distracting surely. How about discussing the rise in racism and getting some organising done on the issue?

But surely the important issue here is the rise in racism

And what about Doire or are you failing to recognise the anti-imperialist credentials of the Irish language? And I don't actually know how to spell it in Ulster Scots or I'd complain that you hadn't used that wee dialect either. Lununderagh perhaps?

oh fuck off you cock!

perhaps cos they feel that labelling all loyalists racists is a bad strategy for trying to tackle actual fascists in loyalist areas.

Anti racist network is all fine and dandy but it's complete lack of class analysis means it is generally a piss poor attempt at gesture politics.

Fascists out campaign is not an ongoing organisation but rather a group set up to tackle fascists in specfic circumstances.

C'mon revol surely you can deal a bit more seriously with those questions rather than just telling 'James Connolly' to fuck off. While although the opportunity to tell the real James Connolly to fuck off may seem urgent and pressing this ain't him - he's a long time dead.

Yeah as revol68 said the ARN lack a class analysis and like RESPECT and other such groups that the SWP/SEA are involved in this tends towards support for and building alliances with some pretty reactionary people on one hand and muting criticism of homophobia, sexism and anti-working class attitudes and action by Islamic fundamentalists on the other. For having the audacity to defend workers organisations in Iraq and point out that they are being attacked by Islamic fundamentalists a comrade speaking at a public meeting was attacked by a leading SEA/SWP member and ARN activist for being Islamophobic.

Just to be clear I have no problem with people following a religion. Its when the religion starts to impose its moral code on others and gets entwined with state power and coercion that I have a (bigger) problem. I extend my 'intolerance' to fundamentalists of all religions and creeds.

Having said that the ARN are doing and have done some really worthwhile work in local communities. The position on the police has been a bit all over the place with calls for more policing and more proactive policing against racists with at the same time the WARN crowd issuing the welcome pack advising immigrants not to involve the police if they are the victim of crime. As for soft on loyalism at least one 'leading' ARN member was consulted in relation to the production of Loyalists Against Fascism posters. While I don't think there is anything wrong with this the tone of yer post implies that you may have problems with it - only implies cos you haven't told anyone what you think.

I was given some verbal when speaking at the ISF by members of the Sparticist League a while back. They demanded that no-one work with loyalists and basically put forward the line that all loyalists are fascists and that FOC (who I was speaking on behalf of) were soft on loyalism. The facts are that there are tensions and contradictions within loyalism (and the broader unionist family). There is only one thing that holds this 'ideology' together and that is a desire to carry on the maintenance of the union. Yeah for many the concept of British nationalism and flag waving puts loyalism pretty close to British fascism but there are many loyalists who see their 'Britishness' as a question of citizenship not nationality.

Also its pretty fucked up for anti-fascists to start from the position that 'they are all fascists' (usually 'they', even if you say 'loyalist' means 'prods') especially if we want to tackle fascism, fascists and racist thugs in 'loyalist' areas. It would mean we simply could not operate outside of 'Irish nationalist' areas... I mean, wtf, this amounts to painting fascism as a bigger problem than it is and deliberately excluding yourself from working in a shit load of working class protestant areas cos they are under 'fascist' control.

Were the ARN soft on loyalism when members of it were involved in a multi-ethnic cultural event in the Village. Surely putting this on there after attacks had occurred was a good move? Surely if all these loyalists were fascists it would have been impossible to carry off this event?

Should anti-fascists welcome anti-racist statements and activity from loyalists or condemn them as publicity stunts carried out by fascists? How come a 'fascist' organisation like the UDA promotes two half egyptians right to the top in north belfast? Maybe cos while the organisation has undoubtedly attracted fascists, and has British fascist support , it is not in any committed or ideological sense a fascist organisation? Now if we want to tackle loyalist paramilitarism for what it is fine lets do that but lets not make the task of a group specifically targeting fascism and fascists all the more difficult, eh?

Provoking discussion with cut and pasted articles and three line comments or questions without offering your opinion is still pretty off.

Why not let everyone know what you think of the ARN, the FOC and what your reasons are for seeing the FOC as 'soft on loyalism'?

Cheers;

Boringggggg...

from what youse have been saying....

Revol/sam as commited anti-racists in Ireland, with so much to contribute to what needs done and how we should define ourselves, we can continue this discussion where it matters...on the street..

the boul boy and street will tog out..... or are you can gonna continue to hurl from the ditch?

see ya soon

um, excuse my ignorance but what does 'tog out' mean street?

This is a prettu interesting discussion - could Revol68 and Oisleep maybe try and allow it the space to develop. I'd like to see a detailed and serious response to Boul's post - most of which I'm inclined to agree with as it stands.[/i]