Socialist Republic: no. 3, October 1975

LIST

UBLIC

AL 50¢ 7p (10p in Britain) (Incorporating "THE PLOUGH

ELAND

i i

PAPER OF THE REVOLUTIONARY MARXIST GROUP

No.3 Oct. )

PORTUGAL

THE MARE

SPAIN

a + | - IR J

H AGAING|

P J

us. Flock Dear Comrades, | am writing to express dissatisfaction with the article “Shepherd versus Flock” in Socialist Republic No. 1. While the phrasing in the article could not be considered exceptionable it was presented in an order that tended to confuse the reader.

Thus the article declared: “The Church .. . seeks to retain a firm hold over the flock it regards as sheep... is eager to ally itself to Government, to act a5 an-agent of social control for the state and thus increase its strength as an institution in the state... has sought to place a brake on militancy on the streets against repression, turning its official venom against militants within the Catholic community”. However, the analysis given implies that this is clerical policy, rather than something integral to the system. A disillusioned priest's reference to the Church as “middle class” is quoted and Stress is nid on the anti (physical) repressive activities of Father Faul whilst his notorious (but inevitable) hatred of Republicanism and of women is ignored, although they tend to handicap the credibility precisely of his moves against repression. So it is implied that it is at least possible for mass action to bring such pressure to bear on the Church in Northern ireland that it turns into a working class or, at least-a less “middle class” body.

In fact, since the Church international ‘surrendered to Constantine in the 4th century, its sheep have regularly been trying to assert their authority over their shepherds.

The results of such attempts over the years have become increasingly satisfying to scientific observers, although at no time have they been what was originally intended. At first the Hierarchy managed to crush them with, yes, “dungeon fire and sword", but, with the spread of civilisation it had to accept the break-up of its organisation and now the actual los of the simple faith of its undisciplined members, Accordingly support for the Des Wilsonites B® not simply support for a democratic movement, it is rather support for such a movement that can only achieve democratic advance not only within a wider struggle but altogether outside its terms of reference, Asa further complication, it is particularly necessary to recognise this, insofar os, particularly in education, the Loyalists are ready and willing to counterpose to democratic demands loyalty to their state rather than the Church. All propaganda on these matters must be geared to these facts and towards democratic secular control of society particularly education rather than towards a utopian, democratic church. Yours fraternally,

FERGUS MC ART

We preprint here part of a leaflet dealing with the Crimtnal Law Jurtdtetion Bttl tgeued by the Untted Anti-Internment Committee in Belfast recently.

KILL THE BILL!

Southem Aid to Loyalist takeover While British Imperialism and the loyalists move towards restoring an Orange ascendancy administration in the Six Counties, the Southern Government is preparing to put into action its own Measures against the anti- Unionist population; centred on the proposed Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Bill. This bill, due to go before the Dail in October, can only assist the offensive of the Loyalists in the North and the repressive machinery of the British Government. Following hard on the heels of Southern Defence Minister Paddy Donnegan's statement that the Irish Army would not be prepared to aid the northern anti-unionist population in a civil war situation, there can be little doubt that the Cosgrave Government intends with this new 8111 to intensify its own already strong repressive ‘@pparatus and to bring to a ‘Tew level its collaboration with the British Government. The Btll proposes: Acts judged to be political offences by the British Government committed in the North can be tried in the South. Thus the Southern Government intends to carry on the work of the RUC and British Army in to the 26 Counties. Prosecutions under the proposed bill would be initiated following requests from the RUC A force which has shown clearly its bias towards loyalists and rejected by the anti-unionists of the north is to be accepted by the Southern Government.

Authority is given for civilians to arrest anyone they believe to have committed an offence in the Six Counties. With three loyalists at present in jail, charged with an attempt to kidnap an Armagh man living in Monaghan, the significance of this cannot be highlighted enough. It gives the green light to loyalist paramilitaries to enter the South on kidnap missions. The Bill aims to add new offences to the statute book, such as threatening up to seven years imprisonment for anyone who has escaped from custody in the north, whether convicted or not.

It takes advantage of existing repressive legislation, and those tried under it can be expected to go before juryless Special Courts. In addition, penalties for a number of offences will be increased - up to 15 years for hi-jacking, for instance.

The Bill is not unopposed in the South. The ITGWU has passed a motion against such legislation reflecting the basic opposition within the working class to such repressive moves. The anti-unionist population of the Six Counties must strive ‘ alongside anti-imperialist groups, north and south to turn this into active opposition capable of defeating the Bill

In Russia, 1917, international capitalism buckled at its weakest link. Today, Iberia is the weakest link, the Portuguese dictatorship smashed , the Franco regime in its death throes and the working class increasingly militant and organised. Faced with this situation, international capitalism is in no confusion as to where “Mits interests lie. The withdrawal from Spain of a number of foreign Ambassadors following the murder of five anti-fascist militants recently was a gesture aimed more at satisfying liberal opinion at home rather than hitting at the dictatorship.

The Ambassadors are, indeed, now trickling back to Madrid even as Franco promises further repression. The reality is that these supposedly "horrified" governments are economically supporting Spain while at the same time are engaged in massive economic sabotage in an effort to break the momentum of working class struggle in Portugal. And of course, they are carrying out these policies alongside and with the support of those Governments which did not feel it necessary to make even token protests against Franco, such as those of the USA, Britain and the 26 counties. The policy means; SPAIN: A new agreement on cooperation with the US signed at the beginning of October.

The US Government stated support for the Spanish regime was a "highest priority for Western defence’. The deal included the sale of arms to Spain worth &375m. The suggestion that the EEC should reconsider its relations with Spain following the executions was quietly dropped.

PORTUGAL: The US based ITT multi-national has cut off all finance to its Portuguese subsidiaries. The British firms, Leyland, Gardner, Lucas, and CAV have refused to sell essential spare parts for buses and trucks. ICI and Massey Ferguson are demanding cash in advance for all orders to Portugal - an unheard of practice in international dealings. The EEC has publicly stated that aid will be given only to a Portuguese Government that can guarantee stability for capitalist interests - that is: a government which can contain and break the struggle of the working class The recently announced package of*£100m ®assistance" to the current Government is strictly on the assurance that it will be able tocarry this out. At the same time the EEC has brought into force prohibitive tariffs against Portuguese textile and clothing exports, a major sector of the economy.

In Portugal, sections of international capital are following the same policies as they did in the lead up to the coup in Chile. In Spain it is unwilling to dump Franco because it fears the boost this would give to working class struggle.

NO ISOLATION

The workers of Euzkadi and of Portugal need not be isolated as international capitalism intends, With international working class solidarity countering these intentions, the Iberian struggles can be given impetus and open up a revolutionary situation in Europe. In Portugal, right wing violence against the workers movement and manouevres by the bourgeoisie have not defused the struggle against capitalism.

SOLIDARITY WITH THE WORKERS IN STRUGGLE

OF EUZKADI AND THROUGHOUT THE SPANISH STATE.

SOLIDARITY WITH THE WORKERS OF PORTUGAL

NO SUPPORT FOR FRANCO:

FORWARD TO THE IBERIAN AND THE

EUROPEAN REVOLUTION:

a & Spain & ortugal Cockpit of evolution The repression of Franco has far from broken the spirit of the workers of Euzkadi, the Basque country. On no less than three occasions within the past year, general strikes of up to 150,000 workers have br brought Euzkadi to a halt protest against the dictatorship.

IRISH SUPPORT

Following the execution of the five anti-fascist militants, limited protests took place in Ireland. But while some of these were small, they were exemplary in showing how the working Class can hit at Franco.

Ground crew at Dublin Airport refused to handle Iberia aircraft that Sunday. The previous day in Limerick a picket of the Spanish Consulate was held by the Spanish Solidarity Committee, supported by the RMG, Sinn Fein (Kevin 5t.), the IRSP, Sinn Fein (Gardiner Place), and PD. Actions such as these, united demonstrations by anti-imperialist groups, anti- Franco boycotts, can shorten the death agony of the dictat-orship and forward the workers struggle. But they must not be restricted to isolated one day only actions. The boycott must be extended

Had Eamon de Valera died ten years earlier, the event would have been less relevant to the time, even though he would still have been President. Then, it seemed clear that ‘there was on the agenda a peaceful but major qualitative change in Irish polities and society such as would sweep away partition and the dominant place of religion in the Irish consciousness. through major politics of economic development based on foreign imperialist monopoly. Capitalism in Ireland could and would out-grow the settlement associated with the man who had administered for so long.

To-day the fragility of trish capitalism is all too apparent: Partition has not proved susceptible to being reformed out of existance. The “economic miracle” of the nineteen sixties can now be seen to have been done with mirrors. And, faced with the threats to their authority that these failures have produced, the twenty six county government is falling in behind the Church whilst the British administration in the six counties is preparing to hand state power to Orangemen who are if anything even less progressive than those who were Dev's opposition numbers during his career.-Dev's bady has begun to moulder in his grave, his soul may not be marching on but it is alive and kicking and will probably continue thus as long as Ireland remains capitalist.

Understanding De Valera The political relevance of De Valera was emphasised by the refusal of the present government to do more than make the barest formalities suitable to the interment of a President. Not only did Cosgrave find himself unable to say anything of the man whose mantle he inherits, embarassing though the fact of this inheritance. is, but a large part of the radjo commemoration was given over to the senile ravings of De Valera’s old rival, John A. Costello, mainly forthe propagandation of Costello's assertion that “he has left nothing of permanent value’.

(Just what Costello will be supposed to have left when he departs, im his turn, it will be interesting to learn from the commentators).

This characteristic meanness is compounded by the inability of those who genuinely do admice de Volera to explain their position comvincingly. Lynch for example concentrated (as befiting the ideologist of “standing idly by” whilst Derry burnt) on the fact that “when (Dev) saw that the continuance of the struggle in arms was unwise in the national interest, he, for fifty years in elected office, espoused peace throughout the land and reconciliation between all Irish méenand women.” Also mentioned by other panegyrists were his leadership of, for the period, a relatively progressive economic policy in the nineteen thirties, and, of course, his maintenance of Irish neutrality during the Second World War. All this tends to reinforce the Costello thesis. What really prevents the admirers of De Valera from giving o detailed appreciation of their hero is precisely the fact mentioned above. The continuing relevance of the politics associated with him are ever more embarrassing to them than to his detractors.

For nearly fourteen years, Fianna Fail had had him locked up safely in the Phoenix Park whilst his. successors tried desperately to piece together 2 programme that would proceed from the point reached before him. The party failed; it may be caved from political limbo by the failure of the national coalition but even if it returns to power it will be in nearly all respects imprisoned in the social straightiacket that is associated with its first leader. Dev's role The central fact about the career of De Valero is that he was the figurehead under whom the Insh national revolution was advanced to the 4 furthest point compatible with its bourgeois character and wo further. This is not.so say that different demands of the struggle for Irish independence that had to be jettisoned in De Valera’s time cannot be refurbished at a later date. Already the economic collapse of the British economy has been followed by a number of kites hinting at breaking the connection between the Irish Purr and the British pound, [t is also possible, though less immedistey likely, that the question of national unification could be solved within an imperialist context. What is certain, however, is that for such changes to take place in such a manner, they will have to be taken individually, over a number of decades, and based as much, or even more, on outside factors (e.g. the decline of Britain), as on internal factors.

It was under the leadership of De Valera that Ireland went “this far and no further”, There can be no doubt that he was history's first choice for this task. He was helped by the theoretical vagueness that is a crucail part of Republicanism a3 well as by the failure of the Irish Labour Movement to fill Connolly's place at the left of the national forces. Nonetheless it was his own peculiar talent for hair splitting allied to his prestige as the supposedly most senior surviving Commandant of the 1916 Rising (the rightful claimant to this title was the Tréeatyite Michsel Staines) that enabled him to use this vagueness to the utmost and keep the Socialists ina state of permanent isolation.

Ai no time were his gifts shown better than in the period where they seemed to have failed him: after the drafting of the Treaty and before the Civil War. Basically, the problem was one af finding « formula to bring the mass of the tank and file Republican militants to accept the hegemony of British imperialism and thus liquidate any possible revolutionary opposition to it.

De Valera's famous Documents 2 and 3 were each designed to do this by the formula of “External Association” between the Republic and the Empire. However a majority of Dail Fireann was prepared to accept something les than these and far less than the aspirations of the freedom fighters, Under the leadership of Collins and Griffith, it voted for the Treaty to avoid “immediate and terrible war". In the event they got just that: a civil war, and blamed De Valera for siding with their opponents and those of the Treaty. Dev's “achievements” Nonetheless, by doing this, Dev ensured that a relatively conservative wing would be maintained within Republicanism so that, after the War had ended in inevitable defeat for it, this wing would come to the top both of of the movement and of the twenty six county state. His party, Fianna Fail, was better suited to the counter revolutionary period than his “Documents” had been; its policy combined moderate social reforms, a formally Republican thetoric and a realistic appreciation of the possibilities of seizing state power. Against it, in the Republican movement were, on the one hand, the hard line Republicans who could not admit defeat, and, on the other the Socialist wing which Was prepared to agree with Fianna Fail's tactics, and which was accordingly used by it and then discarded.

Fianna Fail-was able to act os a more radical government, It was able to carry the Irish national revolution further than it might have done, This was because of the depression, which first highlighted the weaknesses in the Treatyite Policies and forced Fianna Fail to actually carry out its proposals for protection of potential and developing Irish industries, and which enabled it to surive an economic war with Britain over certain outstanding points of the Treaty settlement without backing down on the precise points involved (though they didn't exhaust the remaining objective [rish national demands by any means). With the surrender in 1938 of Britain's 26 county naval bases, her recognition of De Valera’s “Documentary” relationship with her and her renunciation of financial claims outstanding in exchange for a lump sum, the tole of progressive capitalism in [reland was completely exhausted, Fianna Fail and De Valera settled down to a period of maintenance of the status quo, buttressed, as always in Irish struggle after every defeat and compromise for the anti-colonial struggle, by new, in this case constitutional, concessions to the Catholic Church By international even international bourgeois standards, de Valera's achievements were not impressive. Nonetheless, what he did was the most that any Irish bourgeois politician could do or will ever do, The sheer mediocrity of the leaders of Irish capitalist politics to-day reflects the fact that its operators are working by rules laid down by another, De Valera’s lice will not be seen again.

Praise be.

R. LYSAGHT

The path toanew Stormont §

—PAISLEY

and CRAIG ;

DISAGREE ‘_

The recent dispute within Unionism has centred on disagreement on the tactics for restoring a loyalist controlled administration in the North, And it has highlighted once more the fact that British imperialism cannot bring about a Stable situation in the six counties based on compromise between Loyalism and the Catholic population. “Mr. Nice Guy"? William Craig's plan for the coming period was received with immediate enthusiasm by the press, eager to find a new “moderate” Loyalist. But reality is different. Craig himsell has been quick to point out that he in no way favours power sharing. With his plan he aimed to win support from the SOLP by giving them participation in various sectors of administration, in order to give a “democratic™ cover to progress towards Loyalist domination. He saw that such a cover would be invaluable both for making Loyalist takeover easily acceptable to the British and 26 county Governments, while also capable of undermining concerted resistance within the anti-unionist ghettoes of the North, It marked no change of heart for Craig, but a realisation that while British Imperialism is Prepared to back the Loyalists so that they may act a6 Britain's policeman in the six counties, it might not be prepared to stand back in a civil war situation as it did in the UWC strike, if its interests within the North and stability in Britain ittelf were to be threatened.

it was a plan described by the Belfast Newsletter, which swung behind Craig, as “The indispensable ‘golden key" to @ new and better Stormont parliament™. There can be litthe doubt what this hard lina Unionist paper meant by that.

The plan dows not contradict Craig's support for independence as the last resort for regal ning Orange ascendancy. It is cignificant that the naramilitary forces which share this philosophy, orimarily the UDA, have come out behind Craig. Explicitly opposed to being used by JUUC politicians as a stick with which to threaten other forces, the UDA called for the sontinuation of UWUC-SDLP discussions.

Notably the major paramilitary exception to his support was the UVF. Having escalated oe its murder campaign after losing ground within Loyalism, because of its adherence to integration with the UK asa-final solution, it how attempts to politically differentiate itself from the other paramilitary groups by failing in behind the UWUC majority on this issue, Loyalist manouverings Craig's plan is fora “peaceful” restoration of loyaliat power, that is, avoiding mass anti-unionist resistance, but certainly not ruling out continued loyalist assassination campaigns.

Even if the overall plan failed it would, by increasing divisions within the anti-unionist population of the North and confusion within the 26 counties and Britain, place the loyalists ina favourable position for negotiated independence.

But the plan received little support within the UUUC itself, forcing Craig's resignation from its co-chairmanship. This refiects the sheer weight of opposition within the Loyalist population to any form of power sharing with Catholics. Undoubtedly Paisley took advantage of the crude beliaf among loyalists that Craig's plan wes the same as power sharing, to gain ground in the UULIC, but there appears to be deeper reasons involved. Sensing a build up to more openright wing policies from the British - Conservative Party, Enoch Powell has been active in the background of the Craig-Paisley controversy, rallying support for total intransigence. It may be assumed that the recent visit of Tory spokesman on Northern Ireland, Airey Neave, and his private discussions with the UUUC, added weight to this argument, a6 did the apparent first shots of 6 right wing offensive by Margaret Thatcher on her US visit. t is also motesie that the Conservatives are to discuss developing closer ties with the UWUC once more in the near future.

Paisley is banking on Tory policy developing in this direction to the extent of breaking the Westminster bi-partisan approach to the gix counties, and once again playing the Orange Card.

It is the opportunity Powell has been waiting for ever since he came-to the six counties in order to build a base to spring back in to the mainstream of British politics. Evidently Paisley has been convinced that by appealing to the sectarian instincts of Loyalism he can strengthen his position and that of the UUUC so that it can gain from this Tory swing.

The Conservative Party may well be about to offer the British ruling class a blatantly repressive solution to the present British economic crisis, but it is by no means certain that this would be extended to the North. Nevertheless, the effect of Paistey and Powell's actions has baen to sabotage Craig's scheme. The overwhelming majority of the UULIC is against it, and even if Craig were to win increasing support to his ideas, they will be from now on so unconvincing as a genuing gesture of partnership in administration, that the SOLP could not hope to take part and retain credibility with the anti-unionist population.

ei -—— OT 5

After nine months it has become clear that for British Imperialism the truce with the Provisional [RA has failed to reap the benefits hoped for.

Far from opening up a period in which the SDLP could agree to a government structure which would peacefully herald a new loyalist policed North, Imperialism faces a Catholic working class militant in reaction to loyalist aggression, and loyalist forces determined to enforce their demand for a protestant ascendancy. Why Britain couldn't gain from truce From lest year’s LIWC strike, the British Government has had to come to terms with the loyalist demands. Unwilling to face a head on clash with loyalism yet equally anxious to avoid an open hand over of administration (because of the resistance it would invoke within the catholic population) its policy has rested on attempts to draw up agreement between the SDLP and the UUUC. This would allow the drawing up of an administration giving central local power to the loyalists but with nominal SDLP participation to buy off the catholic population. This has been the aim of the convention.

Two major factors have stood in the way of this plan, First, the catholic working class has not been demoralised to a degree that it will not oppose moves towards a hand over to Loyalism.

Resistance to the re-introduction of the RUC to catholic areas has borne witness to this. Secondly, the dynamic of loyalism has been towards the smashing of catholic opposition, leading to demands for an end to the truce and increased British Army activity, and an undiluted restoration of loyalist ascendancy. It has been in this context that William Craig, whose latest scheme falls more within the framework of British policy, has found himself temporarily isolated within the UUUC.

British imperialism hoped that by gaining a ceasefire from the Provisionals a process would open up to alter both these Austin Currie sought to increase measures against the anti-internment rent and rate Strikers, to the extent of oversaeing ‘security’ — repression of anti-unionist resistance to moves to restore loyalist domination.

CRAIG & PAISLEY

cont'd from previous page; -—— SDLP gets breathing space The SOLP were ready to go slong with Craig's proposal. John Hume stated that the party was seriqusly considering the suggestion of participation, and that this involved a leading role In 3 security committee. A strong section of the SOLP wes prepered to give their stamp of approval toa Loyalist take-over, in return for offices in administration, They were ready to go even further than during the life of the Executive when 6 The Loyalist rejection of Craig's plan has, for the moment, meant that the divisions Inside the SDLP are not likely to turn to splits. The Party has been sable to run for cover under a “principled” position, of returning to demands for power-sharing, But once again it has bean shown that the “principles” of the SDLP amount to little more than words. In action.the Party stands for conciliation and emllaboration with the enemies of the working class of the oppressed minority.

the next fey months, With the intransigent cheracter of Loyalism once more stated by the UUIUC, British imperialism and northern middle class interests ote floundering in search of new methods for pulling 8greement between Loyalist and Catholic politicians out of thin air. Suggestions of referendums or further elections have been mooted, and Fees now talks in terms of extending the life of the Convention following the submission of its report to Westminster. But Imperialism has failed to alter the basic social forces within the North over the past six years, and it will not achieve this in manouvers over factors. It was hoped tha return for an agreement harassment in-anti-union the release of internees v policeman of the ghettoe on mass militancy. This, beHeved, would in turn zi increased room for mano accomadation to the UU This did not happens Mo thought that the ceasefi moderate unionists to re Again, this hope was unfd in the nature of loyalism a way. Loyalism is not a reac] antitunionist violence, b aimed at restoring Protes in the North and a defend advantages. Thus the ces result in an erosion of the intransigents, but resulted consolidation and unanin around calls for an end off for offensive action again catholic community. How the truce could h The truce period has been imperialism and has been anti-imperialist movemen’ that the murderous intent has been fully exposed b anti-unionist population loyalism's own offensive retaliation for Republican From this, the reasoning q justifying collaboration has been weakened and w credibility of the party ay leadership. The ceasefire } consolidation of the anti movement. The tendency military campaign to isol of its supporters from the disorientated mass of the class has been countered, say that the opportunitie: during the truce have bee Tt must be acknowledgi question of an anti-impe going into a period of trus negotiating with the impe

ice not a moral question, but is purely a rovos, i ee Bo matter of what advantages can be won from ¢ and for wuch a situation to further the cba anti-imperialist struggle.

A successful example of the use of vie negotiations with Imperialism were the . SDLP Paris negotiations between representatives aosil allover of the Provisional Revolutionary — take place, Government of Vietnam and the US twat government. These culminated in the dallow the signing of an agreement by which the PRG port. ‘ would respect the existing borders i it is not between territory under their control and ct in such areas under the Thieu regime and direct imperialist intervention, the US forces, 5 would be withdrawn. offensive rea The period was used by the PRG for lid mot the consolidation of the liberated zones, ist now freed from continual US bombardments and a process commenced which was to see the recomposition of urban opposition to the puppet Thiew regime which led to the administrations disorganization and collapse, The Paris accords were used to gain certain advantages from Imperialism een used while reorganising opposition. It was clearly not in any way an attempt to ure for reach an agreed settlement with either fantage to the J§ Imperialism or the Thieu regime, c ‘boyalism uct and as meant but a3 2 tactical manovevre, e loyalists he Proves waver ~~ The shackles of the Eire Nua policy, ary actions. involving concepts of agreement between SDLP in the Provisionals and the British « Levalints government and loyalist organisations, the ignoring the realities of the social forces itical at work in the North, has ruled out . such a clear cut policy by the Provisionals alist in the truce period.

ewes Asa result the Provos have appeared ities ee to waver between the needs of some - within the organisation's leadership who ined r seek compromise and agreement with tis is sip . imperialism, and the demands of the pe a working class in the northern anti-unionist og Z ghettoes. The nature of the incident ail A centres, whether aspects of collaboratio with the British Government, or : organs of working class organisation; it the and the Provos attitude to them is rganisation — indicative of this. In the early days of the f truce, Seamus Loughran, Sinn Fein power is Northern Organiser, announced that The refusal of the anti-unionist working class he six counties to submit ta s Stormont-type me and the pressure of the Loyalist ulation for an open restoration of the Orange ndancy remain incompatible, The tradiction will not be solved in the lamentary arena, as the Loyalists showed they arstood in last year's UWC strike.

The need remains paramount for the imperiatist organisations to unite to rebuild reorganise opposition to the hand over to ilism in the North, and against repression and iboration with British Imperialism and the loyalist, in the South.

| — While Britains plans fail, chances Open for anti-imperialists; they would cooperate with plain clothes RUC detectives and allow them in to the ghetto areas to investigage serious crime. This appeared to fall directly in to the trap set by British Imperialism to allow a restoration of the RUC in such districts. Pressure from within the ghettoes forced the statement to be retracted almost immediately and within days the Belfast Command of the Provisional IRA stated the RUC would never be allowed to return to the ghettoes and that local defence vigilantes would be organised to operate from the incident centres.

In line with this, Peter Arntis, writing in “Republican News’ on August 2, stated: “The transformation of the Truce Incident Centres into organisational centres for minority political expression has destroyed the constituency control of local SDLP politicians. Ignoring these boundaries the truce incident centres have political leadership to any developing crisis on the streets": It is an exaggeration of the actual nature of the centres, They have a role as advice centres and have strengthened the political credibility of local Provisional Sinn Fein work in some instances. But there has been no real attempt to fulfill the potential of the centres by using them as organising centres of resistance now. They are giving no positive lead to the struggle on the streets, The following week, Maire Drumm, speaking at Sinn Fein's major Belfast anti-internment rally, appealed for confidence in the leadership of the Provisionals: “The Republican Movement is now negotiating with the British.

They are carrying out these negotiations honourably, We ask you to trust the leadership of the Republican Movement.

They will not sell you out, they will not barter you for British gold,” She accompanied this with a restatement of the demands for an end te internment, and freedom for political prisoners.

Later in the month, Republican News reported on the breakdown of talks between the SDLP and UUUC with the headline ak Initiative passes to the people”. On One hand the people are asked to fully support the secret negotiations of the Provisional leadership and on the other that the initiative has passed to themselves. The contradiction iustrates the failure to take full advantage of the opportunity to Teorganise opposition to imperialism as the organisations responsiveness to the needs of the catholic working class is distorted by Eire Nua and elements of the organisations leadership.

Once again, united action is the answer The failure of the Provisional Republican Movement to unite in protest with other groups falls in with this distortion.

United action can play a major role in Teotganising and strengthening opposition to imperialism and in limiting the SDLP's room for manouevre further.

In action, with the loyalist attacks on Divis Flats on the weekend of August 9, the Proves along with: other anti-imperialist military groups showed their willingness to work together in defence of the catholic working class. And in ‘Faoi Glas’, paper of Provisional sentenced prisoners the following call was made: “At this crucial stage of our Nation's history, a mobilisation of all anti-imperialist forces, who, of course, still maintain their own identities, would soon achieve the centuries old dream. The reason [ have underlined anti-imperialist is because | mean precisely that — that is the only common denominator required. It would not include those who recognise Britain's right in lreland. Plainly and simply, anti-imperialist". Included in an article entitled “War ef Words” this statement is a call for an anti-imperialist front of organisations. Yet the Provisional leadership has stood against taking these words into action, as their refusal to unite with other forces in demonstrations over the | internment anniversary period illustrated.

The Provos remain the dominant antiimperialist group in the North, but with united action on the streets with other organisations a force can be created which draws into action greater numbers than the individual organisations can mobilise independently. This is a primary reason | for the need for unity, and why it is so important for the reorganisation of opposition to imperialism and the loyalist take over. The Provisionals must play their part in this, but they can only do so with a clarification of the aims of the truce and the tactics by which Imperialism can be |, overthrown in Ireland.

G. LAVERY

BELFAST R.M.G.

THE ECONOMIC CRISIS

behind the Following last June’s “‘mini-budget” a strange line up of forces emerged in the economic and manoeuvres political sphere, with the Government backing the demands of the trade union leaders as against those of the Federated Union of Employers. Of course we are used to the government employers and trade union bureaucrats playing their little games in the hope of bemusing and pacifying the rank and file workers, But on this occasion it would be dangerously wrong to think that the performing trio is putting on just another act. In fact what we are witnessing is a real crisis of perspective in the ruling class.

Buying time The Federated Union of Employers see that the economy is ina critical condition and is demanding immediate and decisive action to deal with the situation. On the other hand the government and trade union leaders, who have their reputations to think about, want to pursue a policy of, literally, buying time.

This is the policy that all three partners have been pursuing, for a long time, especially over the last period. Lreland’s rate of inflation (which has been consistently higher than all our main trading partners over the past several years) has lead to a loss of industrial competitiveness which, under normal circumstances, would have lead to an-enormous crisis of profitability, a fall in investment, massive redundancies, a .

decline in consumer demand culminating in a general economic collapse, As it is these symtoms are already menacingly apparant. Hut an outbreak of crisis has been temporarily averted by a large dose of Government borrowing (which expanded by 610% since 1970) and by running up a debt with our trading partners (equivalent to 10% of our GNP). The massive proportions of this borrowing and balance of payments deficit shows the extent to which Irish capitalism is living on borrowed time.

Sooner or later these debts will have to be paid back, Originally it was hoped to avoid the hour of reckoning by using the “borrowed time” to re-establish industrial competitiveness by reducing wages and increasing productivity ie.

by reducing wage-unit costs. This was the objective of government policy which over the last period, combined expansionist budgetary policy with the implementation of National Wage Agreements. But this policy was far from successful.

On the one hand, as we have already seen, a huge debt has accumulated. On the other hand although the rising trend of wages has been somewhat restricted, there was no major change on this front. According to the National Economic and Social Council, real wages rose by 124% under the first NWA, 12%% under the second NWA and by 28% under thei third NWA (co/f The Economy in 1974 and Outlook for 1975 p. 41). In the meantime the battle for productivity was not showing much. success either, Output per man hour increased by only 15% in the past three years, which, while reasonable by international standards was not nearly sufficient to compensate for parallel wage increases. Thus over the period unit wage costs rose by a whopping 37.2% which was way above the figure for all our closest trading partners (e.g. U.W.C.s in Britain, France and West Germany increased by only 32.8%, 25.2% and 14.8% respectively) Underlying crisis come to the surface The underlying crisis in Irish capitalism and the smouldering crisis in the ruling class's strategy for dealing with i has been brought into focus by the international recession. Every major economic indicator shows that the crisis cannot be concealed or postponed for much longer. Gross ‘domestic fixed capital is expected to fall by 8% this year. Output will be down a further on last year, unemployment is now over 1(% and consumer expenditure, which has been falling continuously since the second quarter of 1973, was expected to fall again by another 3% before the mini-budget was announced, inflation was expected to rise bya further 25% this year.

Tf the Irish economy is to escape a total collapse then it must be geared to take advantage of any short term upturn that may possibly follow from Europe and the U.S.A. This means that industrial competitiveness must be re-established immediately. The only possible way to accomplish this mission is by a drastic cut back in wages.

And that is exactly what the employers are demanding from the government and trade unions.

* The government and trade union leaders are aware of the urgency of the situation, But they must consider the political consequence of any sudden move to tighten the workers belt. They have therefore opted for a stages approach — they want to borrow a bit more time ond make a more serious effort within the space of this time to reduce wages substantially. Accordingly there has been a dramatic turn about since the January budget when the Minister for Finance introduced a “moderately” expansionary budget borrowing only £127m. Even this sum was considered by the government to be a bit on the extravagent side.

Since then the government has opted, in the June mini-budget, to borrow a further 70m.

The purpose of this is to finance a reduction in consumer prices in order to entice workers to abandon phases two and three of the 4th NWA and accept a wage cut instead. [t is then hoped that once the magic spell of wage increase is broken that workers will resign themselves to the hairshirt and tight belt in the future. This is what Mr, Ryan means when he speaks of the governments “package deal” being designed to break the “inflation psychology”.

Employers sceptical The employers, however, are sceptical that the policy of “buying time”, even with the utmost cooperation of the trade union bureaucracy, will be any more successful as a short-term strategy than it was as a long term strategy. Firstly the price reductions are too costly for the amount of breathing space and manoeuvring they offer — according to the Summer Central Bank Report, prices will be rising again in the last quarter of the year and the annual rate of inflation will have been reduced from 255% to only 22.7%. This does not offer much hope for defeating the

“pay chology of inflation”, while the expense of trying to do so will have|mortaged the future of [rish capitalism to an even greater and more dangerous degree than before, Secondly, while the linking of wages to prices should ordinarily result in a fall in real wages given that no allowance is made for taxation and the bogus nature of the consumer price index, this may not happen under the terms of the “mini-budget™. One economist, writing to the ‘Lrish Times’ put it as follows: “Some may feel that, since the C.P.[. is cut by 4%, a proportionate 4% fall in money wages keeping real wages constant (ignoring the defects in the C.P.1. — 10) would be appropriate... . Another approach, however, is to angue that since the Minister has reduced taxation by £20m, strict reciprocity would require no more than a £20m cut in the total wage bill of £2,000m fora 1% wage reduction, “By leaving this important question so vague and indeterminate, the danger exists that the price reduction will leave real wages higher than they would have been in the absence of the budget and so do-little or nothing to ease inflation.” (Irish Times, June 27th).

New confrontations Notwithstanding their reservations and scepticism the employers have gone along with the government and trade union leaders on this occasion, But it is obvious that they have done this only ‘on the understanding that if the “package deal" fails the government will opt for a policy of “the big stick”, Thus the anouldering tension that exists between employers and workers can be expected to burst into open confrontations during the course of the next year. Whether or not these confrontations will lead to a defeat of the workers or will, on the contrary, unleash a revolutionary process depends tO a large extent on the intervention of socialists. A key aspect of this intervention will be for the independence of the trade union movement. In the past this fight has been sonceived by some groupings on the Left as simply iuing propagandist calls to the trade union eaders to withdraw from all bodies such as the Employer Labour Conference. Such demands, xy themselves, are useless unless accompanied by ivigerous fight to end the stranglehold of the yureaucracy within the unions. In other words, he fight for democracy within the unions is the wey to the fight for the independence of the trade inion movement as a whole.

Asecond aspect of any socialist intervention oust be the organisation of solidarity with local trikes. This task must. not be thought of as imply in terms of providing material aid; much nore urgent and vital is political leadership, Further, socialists must not neglect work utside the unions such as housewives, small farme tudents, unemployed, without whom there can € no successful fight against inflation, ‘dundancies, wage-cuts and reductions in public «penditure etc. [n many instances these forces ‘ll initiate struggles Jong before the trade unions re roused to action and in such cases fetishisation | f union work (or fear of retaliation by the ureaucracy) will only deprive socialists of veboalie pportunities to give revolutionary | Finally, socialists must not forget that the smomic crisis in [reland is only part of a much ider crisis which is expressed in the failure of titish imperialism attempts to politically defeat \@ anti-unionist working clasa in the north. The ‘onomic and national struggle cannot be itional demands are posed and fought for in a iMiistant revolutionary manner than it will be sarly seen by most workers that the only neral solution to their problems is a 32 Co.

others republic.

\MES CONWAY

Mass action can stop the loyalist offensive The loyalists, despite differences in tactics, broadest possible anti-imperialist alliance in di 1 Lit action. Formed following the decision of teed gittitary aimed ce 9 Provisional Sinn Fein to exclude all other political voices from the August 10 anti-internment a protestant ascendancy state. In recent protest, the Committee has since aimed to draw months the campaign of assassinations and all anti-imperialist organisations into joint indiscriminate attacks on catholic work in opposition to repression.

premises and individuals has had a most ictegnsion amaeenicun ee ee eo ~ immediate effect on life in anti-unionist cannot be doubted. It was significant that the areas of any aspect of the offensive. Committee's August 17 demonstration, the Long Kesh march, drew over a thousand people bas Ow . : out in the street in protest, many uncommitted \Nature of the loyalist offensive to'ainy-specifie orgiaiation and ieinding 6 ig The British Army and RUC have shown themielvesnumber of members of anti-imperialist (unwilling to tackle the loyalist paramilitaries. organisations whose leadership had refused to While attacks on the catholic population, centred take part in united action.

both in Belfast and in the Mid-Ulster murder Since then the Committee has undertaken a @ triangles, over the past year brought only a limited series of street meetings throughout Belfast to and short lived response in British Army and popularise a number of demands and slogana (RUC patrolling, the retaliation against loyalists in South Armagh last month saw the deployment Against the loyalist take over; fof some 650 troops in the area in. an effort to Withdraw the British Army; appease loyalist demands. End Internment; But if the British Army and RUC prefer Free all political prisoners; collusion with the loyalists (as the files given to the UVE and “leaks” to Paisley have demonstrated) to dealing with anti-catholic assassinations, it is a campaign which cannot be No to SDLP collaboration with the loyalists; Oppose the Criminal Law (Jurisdiction) Bill Meetings have been taking place at Ardoyne, the Markets, Divis Flats, New Lodge Road, Short Strand and Andersonstown RUC Barracks and are to culminate ina rally And at the beginning of November a conference is to be held to discuss the building of a united resistance movement against repression and the British hand over to loyalism. All forces must join in The Committee as it exists at the present time is a joint action committee of the RMG, IRSP and PD in Belfast. It is far from being an anti-mperialist united front in the full sense of the term. Major anti-imperialist organisations, Provisional Sinn Fein and the Official Republicans are keeping their distance from uniting against repression. Participation by the major sections of the anti-imperialist movement are essential for any Teal united front. And it must be unity not simply in terms of leaderships agreeing to certain joint activities, but action at all areas of activity at a local level, United activity between the groups cannot be limited.to the six counties: Imperialism, especially since the Lynch Government, has been able to mount an all-ireland offensive against the Republican movement. The attempt is being made ‘to’ bring this to its highest point with the Criminal Committee recently occupied the Bord Failte office in Belfast as a protest against this Bill. There is a need for united activities by anti-imperialist Antmperai unity against the loyalist takeover,Ups to be extended to the south if repression is emanding in protest on the streets the to-be successfully combatted.

ithdrawal of the British Army and disbandment The United Anti-Internment Committee has the RUC and UDR to allow the antiunionist %t itself the task of building support for united W resistance of all anti-imperialist groups. All have dered, could draw in more layers of the been invited to participate in its activities. The 2 class than attend the protests of the people of the anti-unionist areas must call on all individual groups and start to broaden active groups to take part in united actions, and the = sivaiakt in the anti-imperialist struggle. tank and file members of these organisations The formation of the United Anti-Internment @¢™and that their leaderships take up the call for nmittee in Belfast at the beginning of August "ity.

}a step towards this. Supported by the FORWARD TO THE UNITED RESISTAN RMG, [RSP and PD, it has been seen by the CAMPAIGN! - 9 which they form a part has been defeated.

Other aspects of the offensive have been the threats of a further UWC strike, the call for the formation of an “Ulster Army” made up of the RUC and UDR, a loyalist pull-out and @ obstruction tactics in local Government, and above all the united demand by loyalist politicians for an ond to the truce with the Provisionals. All these threats and demands are intended to force the hand of the British Z0Vermment to increase repreasion of the Cathalio working class and accelerate the rebuilding of ia loyalist dominated administration.

The moves of the politicians and the murder ampaign, currently spearheaded by the UVF and including also elements of the UDA and the UVF, UDA, Tara and the Ulster Special Constabulary Association and through the links between the Ulster Army Council and the @ Ulster Loyalist Co-ordinating Committee.

The fight against the loyalist offensive can only be successfully conducted by united action of the anti-unionist working class. It is to start e process of rebuilding unity, self-reliance and confidence within the catholic population ~_ — action by antiimperialist groups is groups as just a beginning to the creation of the

the role of the family Since 1884, when Engels described the origins in private property of women’s oppression and the forms of the family which maintain it, analysis of the family — a reflection on the backwardness of the socialist movement on this little has been done to develop a Marxist question. Only in recent years, as movements for women’s liberation have begun to develop in advanced capitalist countries, have there been some initial attempts. We hope with this article to open the pages of our journal to a discussion which is the essential theoretical task of revolutionary Marxists in the women’s liberation movement.

The working class family As the bourgeoisie assumed the dominant position in society, the forms and functions of the ruling class family were slowly changing. But it was on the jower class family that the capitalist mode of production had the most dramatic impact. The early industrial period was one of extreme exploitation of female labour, women and chitdren being driven into the factory and the mine by the inadequacy of one man's wages — and moreover when the employer had the choice he would in many instances go for the cheaper kinds of labour. The social consequences had dangers for the bourgeoisie, especially in the context of the early crises of capitalist production.

At such times, the mass of the working class, undivided, uncontrolled by the institutions of church or family, with the evidence of their exploitation everywhere about them, could present a terrible threat, a3 they did in Britain over the Charter and the 10 Hours movement. The stirring of the social conscience of the bourgeoisie coincided conveniently with the awakening of fears for property by the condition of the proletariat as it emerged from the first and crudest stages of factory production. From mid-century onwards, there was a tendency for women to be turned back inte the home where economically possible, and at the same time bourgeois ideolay elevated the nuclear family to a central place in the literature, religion and public modes of the epoch.

\t ig hare that we encounter the more insidious forms of women’s oppression in bourgeois society. “The worker is the slave of capitalist society," wrote James Connolly, “the woman is the slave of that slave”. The division of labour in the proleaterian home is far stricter than among the middle classes — where in the last century the bulk of the work wes thrown onto the vast army of domestic servants and in recent times @ certain liberalisation has taken place.

The difference has scarcely lessened in the present century, and relatively the oppression of the working class housewife has probably increased in some respects, for example, her increasing isolation in view of the atomisation of the extended family which reappeared in an urban context in older industrial areas in the late nineteenth century. The nuclear family is the only institution which capitalism has been able to offer the worker to care for his basic wants; the only place, moreover, in which he can be master, It has also provided some kind of goal to justify the need to sell his labour, so-that the division between work and “life” might be maintained as though it were some natural phenomenon, the one being necessary even to the hope of enjoying the other. In this way the collective consciousness of the organised male workers is weakened, the family acting a a brake on trade union militancy.

At the same time as she fulfils this function without cost of employer or state, the woman remains part of a reserve pool of labour. This pool has been drawn upon in particular conditions — in the two world wars (as a result of which certain minimal concessions had to be granted to them); in conditions of high demand for 10 labour, such as the post-war boom, lasting until recent years; and in a different context, in periods of slump, when women are forced out into menial jobs in order to provide any farnily income, or employers lin backward sectors of industry! replace men with cheaper women workers, as happened in some areas in the "30s.

Because of the peripheral nature of this oppressed section of workers, the trade union movement has traditionally been backward on the question of their organisation; the working class woman remains relatively isolated.

Does capitalism need the family?

The bourgeois family, meanwhile, continues to fulfil the function of training children for competition; and perpetuating the idea of a separation of social roles between the sewes.

But this role is increasingly fulfilled by other tocial institutions, notably the whole educational syttem; and the importance of the family in bourgeois society seems increasingly to depend on the ideological and economic function it has in relation to the working class. There are contradictions here in the experience of recent years in the advanced capitalist countries. The family has taken on new roles in relation to consumption, most notably in the commercial exploitation of the family, of the mother-figure and sex-object. But at the same time, and till recently, the living standards of large sections of the working class — and petit bourgeoisie — have risen, and the physical burdens on the housewife have lessened; a capitalism which has proved unable to provide full employment and could find an adequate reserve army of labour within a less rapidly growing population, has been able to tolerate the aclvocacy and use on an increasing scale, of contraceptives, The reserve of female labour has been dravwn on increasingly; and women have turned increasingly to employment outside the home to raise their standard of living and in many cases to provide them with a certain independence, The possibility that capitalism can do away with the family begins to appear, And indead this is not beyond the bounds of possibility: in certain conditions of production, notably plantation slavery, it has occurred before — and we know well enough that the basic contradiction of capitalism, the fundamental, irreconcilable antagonism, is between labour and capital, not between the components of any form of social organisation, such as the nuciear family, which is appropriate to capitalism at a particular period, But when capitalism which has not yet reached such a level of sophistication is plunged back into crisis, in the way we are experiencing at the present time, then the use of the proletarian family in specific ways is again increased; and the ruling class seeks to exploit it, both economically and politically.

And they are not entirely unsuccessful: a working class housewite, isolated from the collective institutions of the class (even if she works she may not be ing union, or she may be in one which neglects: her and her workmates), and burdened with the increasing problems of managing the family budget, can be quite susceptible to intimidation of this kind at a time when the class as a whole has not yet found a way of responding independently and politically to the ruling class offensive. Task forthe present period In recent years. a new revolt has begun stir in the form of the women’s liberation movement, which has emerged in the process of a radical isation of youth throughout the advanced capitalist countries. The rejection of bourgeois norma of social organisation has hed a key place in this process; the absence of great working class defeats, the ideological impact of struggles against imperialism on the advanced capitalist countries, have brought sections of youth to revolutionary politics, Because of the very strength of bourgeois ideology, it ia relatively late in this process that women have begun to see the need for them, as being oppressed in

* Living conditions lower than in the 1930s, * Unemployment at over 20 per cent; 30,000 killed, * Thousands detained in concentration * Over 2,000 simply ‘missing’; * The price of bread up by 140 times; Total sales of food down by over 25 per cent These area few of the statistics that give an ides of the terrible price that the Chilean workers and peasants have had to pay fortwo long years now since the bloody military coup of 17 September | 1973. To them can be added the use of the most modern torture techniques — including the | widespread torture and sexual abuse of women, | the armies of beggars that cram the centres of the cities, the children who die of malnutrition, | and not beast, the awesome atmosphere of fear that pervades the whole country.

The list of the sufferings that have been imposed seemingly never ending, and reveals ine graphic way the horrors of life in the Chile of the generals. particular ways, to organise independently, and the strong tendencies within the women's movement which see the need to relate this new area of struggle to the generalised class struggle are only just beginning to develop the theory which is an indispensable part of that practice. Central to this theory is an analysis of the role of the family in contemporary Capitalism, on the basis of which we can develop the demands which best relate to the struggles of working class women, both at the point of production lincluding demands which relate to the concrete problems of working women with family obligations) and with more difficulty, away from it, We need to understand the restrictive role of the nuclear family — unlike the Statinists, we do not pretend that the nuclear family can somehow be turned into an instrument for revolution — but in order to intervene in and give support to actual struggles, we also need to understand in-what way the family nexus contributes at the present conjuncture of the class struggle to the formation of existing levels of consciousness, The ending of bourgeois family forms of social organisation is a part of our whole perspective for socialist revelution, but in working towards the objective of socialist revolution we have to work from and raise existing levels of consciousness. Work among working class women requires that we raise and accept some demands which relate not just to women alone, but are a part of the struggle of the working class as a whole: because, we repeat, the fundamental contradiction, the contradiction which will lead to socialist revolution, is that between labour and capital, between the proletariat and capitalist classes, and not between the nuclear family and sexual liberation: socialist revolution will Open the possibility of direct struggle for the latt Our immediate task is to help overcome the divisions among the working class, the brakes on consciousness, for which the nuclear family is responsible; and this of course involves an appreciation of women's oppression within the farnily. The junta has exacted a mighty price fram those who dared to threaten the capitalist way of life in Chile, But in doing so it has begun to encounter increasingly seriouproblems. When it came to power it set about applying an economic policy that was designed entiraly to benefit imperialism and those sections of the Chilean bourgeoisie most closely tied to imperialism. It hoped to be able to stabilise the aconomy, create conditions for the super-exploitation of the workforce, and on that basis to draw in foreign capital which could then be used to finance an export-orientated consumer durable goods industry, Chile wes to be a repeat of the Brazilian ‘miracle’ — but times have changed since the Brazilian gorillas carne to power in 'Mféh, and the junta’s strategy was doomed from the start, In the first place, they have not even succeeded in. stabilising the economy. Inflation, for example, ran at over 527 per cent for the 12 months preceding April 1975. Secondly the world recession militates strongly against big investments in the consumer durables sector by imperialist capital — particularly in countries with raging inflation, Added to this have been other factors, such as the fall in the price of copper (the linchpin of the Chilean economy), the necessity for Chile to import 75 per cent of its. oi], and the growing economic and political isolation of the regime which culminated in the refusal of most of the capitalist nations in the "Club of Paris’ to renegotiate the junta’s debts.

As a result, the necessary foreign capital has not come in and the junta is lett with the immediate social consequences of its policies — Unemployment and mass poverty, The failure of its economic measures has Stimulated those sections of the Chilean capitalists who hed least to gain from the junta’s policies toa come out into open opposition to the military. Alecentiy the whole of the bourgeols Christian Democrat party, which represents those Chilean capitalists whose profits depend on the internal market — a market which has been decimated a: 8 consequence of the economic policies — announced that it wes against the junta. A year ago only small sections of this party, which played a major role in preparing the coup, were willing to oppose the regime. No alternative But no matter how strong the opposition and how complete the failure of its economic strategy, the junta still has one trump card to play, It can claim to be the only force which can control the working class, alboit by the mort brutal and sustained repression. The Chilean big bourgeoisie will not consider any alternative to the junta unless if can guarantee its ability to contain the workers and peesants.

The Christisn Democrats have therefore decided to approach the matter from a different angle. They have launched a campaign to win the support of the Chilean workers and peasants in which they seek to pose as the defenders of iberty" and ‘social justice’. This has been taken up in alliance with the hierarchy of the Catholic Church and involves such things a3 soup kitchens where food is freely distributed, and sermons which denounce the torture and arbitary arrests. What of the organisations of the working class?

How are they shaping up to the situation?

Unfortunately it has to be recorded that of the major partie: only the Communist Party and the Movement of the Revolutionary Left (MIR) exist even now inany real sense es organised Structures inside Chile. The MIA has been the main target of the junta’s repression, especially over the last-year, end has lost many courageous militants. Nonetheless, it has managed to survive and i now reorganising and regrouping.

The C.P. on the other hand, has set jtee!f the task of being the best allies of the Christian Democracy. They have drawn the conclusion from the Coup that the main enror of the Popular Unity period was that thay did not form a unity with this bourgeois party earlier (or at least with Important sections of it). Evidently they have been engaged in negotiations with Frei to see if terms for a joint agreement can be reached. They have even been working hand-in-hand with the Christian Democrat forces in their efforts to re-organise the workers’ movement, No mistakes! Outside the country, the parties of the Popular Unity all exist in-exile. They met together jointly for the first time since the coup this August, and decided to reconstitute the Popular Unity.

A statement issued after the meeting announced that ‘errors of leadership were partly to blame for the defeat’, but ‘that in no way detracts from ‘the general correctness of the process begun by the Popular Unity’. In other words, after two years of suffering, after the greatest defeat ever inflicted on the Chilean workers, the leaders of the reformist and Stalinist organisations can only proclaim that they were right all along — and indeed, given half a chance, will apply again the strategy of the gradual and peaceful road to socialism, In the meantime they urge that all democrats in Chile should unite against the junts and that the Army should now seize the opportunity to vindicate (sic) themselves and take action against the generals. In this way the parties of the Popular Unity fall in behind and add their veright to the attempts of the Christian Democracy tc win the support of the working class, Revolutionaries must oppose these machinations, They must ensure that from the blood of the Chilean defeat the lessons are drawn which will ensure tha* never again does a working class have to suffer the ‘peaceful road’ to extinction, It is now an important task to form a united front of the revolutionary left inside Chile — a task which our comrades of the Liga Communista de Chile have set aan important priority in their activities, Such a front would form a clear political pole inside Chile — a means by which revolutionary politics could stand clearly opposed to the class collaboration of the Popular unity, a means by which fresh forces from the left Socialists from the MAPU, even from the CP could be won to the revolutionary road. It is important to see that the Chilean workers and peasants do not stand in isolation. The solidarity campaign that has been waged must be extended, and must increase the scale of its activities so that they can really weaken the junta, Most vital of all ig to understand that the Chilean workers and peasants do not stand in isolation from the rise of world revolution. In Latin America this has taken a particularly dramatic form with the outbursts of the general strikes In Argentina; while in other countries, not least among them Brazil, a rise in the mass struggle is claarly discernible. Thera is no doubt that these events will immeasurably increase the resistance of the Chilean workers and peasants against their military tyrants.

iI

Life 1S VERY HARRY

US KEEPERS OF

CAN THE ANTI-WNIONIST POPULATION

BE SAVED BY A FICTIONAL SUPERHERO P

OR (as seary Fears) 15 THe ANSWER,

ARMED SELF DEFEMCE, ?

IF YOU DOMT READ THE

*SOULALIST REPUBLIC

= YOU PLAY HOT Awow TH Revolutionary Marxist Group

IRISH SECTION OF THE FOURTH INTERNATIONAL

WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE REVOLUTIONARY MARXIST GROUP Send to: The Secretary, A.M.G., 38 Clanawley Road, Dublin 5.

SUBSCRIPTIONS TO SOCIALIST REPUBLIC - £1 per year. Send to above address