TUC Hands off Ireland!
Date:1981
Organisation: Revolutionary Communist Tendency
View: View Document
Discuss:Comments on this document
Subjects:

Please note: The Irish Left Archive is provided as a non-commercial historical resource, open to all, and has reproduced this document as an accessible digital reference. Copyright remains with its original authors. If used on other sites, we would appreciate a link back and reference to the Irish Left Archive, in addition to the original creators. For re-publication, commercial, or other uses, please contact the original owners. If documents provided to the Irish Left Archive have been created for or added to other online archives, please inform us so sources can be credited.

Commentary From The Cedar Lounge Revolution

19th October 2009

This document from the Revolutionary Communist Tendency (UK) is perhaps worthy of particular consideration as an example of Irish related material from the UK, and not merely for its content but also for the fact that the RCT eventually underwent a transformation into the Revolutionary Communist Party which later birthed the contrarians of Spiked. Although the RCP was infamous for its policy positions, and Living Marxism later still for its, one often unnoticed aspect of their platform - at least subsequently - was a very strong identification with Irish independence. This document here can be viewed within that context and while its overall purpose is one that is linked to UK internal politics, and particularly that of the left and the TUC, it is in its analysis of Ireland that it is of most relevance to the Archive.

Very briefly this takes a line that 'the official labour movement has failed to support eh demands for political status of republican prisoners of war in the Six Counties of Northern Ireland... Yet the British TUC interferes in the affairs of the Irish people through the Better Life for All Campaign and the call for a Bill of Rights. TUC Irish policy is simply a cover for its complicity in British repression throughout the Irish War'

Worse again, from the RCT perspective, the TUC refused to endorse the Smash the Prevention of Terrorism Act Campaign "TUC Hands off Ireland!" conference, and had actively barring trades councils from participating in it.

Inside the document takes a strongly pro-Republican movement viewpoint couched in the language of class struggle (and note a message from IRSP prisoners to the Conference)...

Anybody who has read and thought about the conflict in ireland, or visited Belfast or Derry, knows that the two main adversaries in this war are the republican movement and the British State, and yet the media always present 'the troubles' as a sectarian feud between Catholics and Protestants. The first peculiarity of the Irish War, therefore is that its real character as a national liberation struggle is always obscured and denied in Britain.

And the pamphlet argues that 'what is so special about the Irish War that its existence has to be denied... The answer is simple. The War in Ireland is an immediate and mortal threat to the British ruling class'.

Intriguingly, bar a reference to the RUC and the UDR - referenced as the 'local paramilitary forces' - there is no mention of political Unionism.

Also included with the leaflet was a reproduction of Legal Rights for Those Detained issued by Fr. Denis Faul which you can find in jpg form at the foot of this post.

Those of us who have followed the RCP and its metamorphosis into that exotic entity known as Spiked , will recognise that a faint echo of this line has survived their refashioning as contrarians and libertarians, indeed look no further than here for evidence of same ... The Left Archive is interested in material that relates to Ireland from any left source and whether that material is printed in Ireland or outside of Ireland.

More from Revolutionary Communist Tendency

Revolutionary Communist Tendency in the archive


Comments

No Comments yet.

Add a Comment

Formatting Help

Comments can be formatted in Markdown format . Use the toolbar to apply the correct syntax to your comment. The basic formats are:

**Bold text**
Bold text

_Italic text_
Italic text

[A link](http://www.example.com)
A link

You can join this discussion on The Cedar Lounge Revolution

  • By: Kieran Mon, 19 Oct 2009 13:50:07

    Should have been “… an article about the RCP…”

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: WorldbyStorm Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:00:32

    Funny isn’t it though how groups retain something of their earliest incarnation even long after they’ve morphed into something else?

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Garibaldy Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:10:39

    I see a Jim Monaghan named as one of the supporters of the Coventry meeting. Same one?

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Phil Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:55:59

    As I remember it, RA were pro-Provo in a much more serious way – at least two members actually joined up. (Fine URL there.) They also stayed with the Provos after the ceasefire, which suggests a depth of commitment a bit greater than the RCT/P/G’s. Not praising RA particularly – it was the one part of their programme I had real problems with – but I do think they were a bit closer to the real world than a lot of groups were.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: WorldbyStorm Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:05:54

    In reply to Phil.

    That’s true. I kind of have a soft spot for RA perhaps because some of their members went onto the IWCA…

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: splinteredsunrise Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:13:07

    In reply to WorldbyStorm.

    I was never mad about RA. Apart from having a line on the north that actually led them to use headlines like “Fuck the Huns” in their paper, I always had an allergic reaction to this tendency of theirs to go about in bovver boots proclaiming how hard they were. People who are genuinely hard don’t need to advertise the fact. But then, the squads always thought of themselves as an elite even when they were in the SWP.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Garibaldy Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:19:38

    Jesus Christ. That’s fucking outrageous. Not of course that (with the exception it seems of two) they had the balls to get involved. Easier to get to NI than it was to get to Spain in the 1930s.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: NollaigO Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:13:51

    One of the people linked in post #9, a former postal worker, had been in IMG for a long period and briefly in WF [Matgamna was a strong defender of “the solidarity position” in those days]. IIRC correctly, he left WF because they condemned the Birmingham bombings. He then was involved in Kilburn PSF – I know of no involvement by him in RA, a group that materialised in the late 70s.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Ramzi Nohra Mon, 19 Oct 2009 18:51:42

    In reply to WorldbyStorm.

    I remember quite a bit of graffiti in north dublin around 1996 saying “Red Action =MI5”
    I was left unsure about the motivation behind it, as I couldnt see how they could be percieved as “pro-brit”.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: WorldbyStorm Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:52:31

    In reply to WorldbyStorm.

    Perhaps it’s just the IWCA I like 😉

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Nick Mon, 19 Oct 2009 21:38:45

    In reply to Kieran.

    The RCG do seem to have a total hard-on for pretty much every terrorist group on the planet

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Mick Hall Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:40:25

    One of the two volunteers mentioned above is back on the street, and as I understand it, is campaigning away against injustice where ever he finds it. By chance I spotted a letter from him published in an English regional local paper. I will not say where or on what subject, but I thought well done comrade.

    By the way, the IWCA comrades I know, are some of the most sensible people I have met on the English left. They are one of the few groups over here who deliberately work with, what the press call the ‘underclass’ and in the process challenge the BNP street by street.

    Far from being nutters, they are fine and dedicated comrades.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Jim Monaghan Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:09:27

    In reply to Garibaldy.

    There are at least 3 Jim Monaghans. the first has to be the Sinn Fein ex prisoner in Columbia.
    There is another I think in Solidarity in Scotland. He is a contributer to Socialist Unity.
    And me, least of all, who contributes here.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Garibaldy Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:57:01

    In reply to Jim Monaghan.

    Cheers Jim. It was you I meant.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Neues aus den Archiven der radikalen (und nicht so radikalen) Linken « Entdinglichung Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:31:31

    […] Revolutionary Communist Tendancy (RCT): TUC Hands off Ireland! […]

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Left Archive: “Hands Off Ireland!” – The Revolutionary Communist Group, Number Nine, November 1979 « The Cedar Lounge Revolution Mon, 25 Oct 2010 08:34:31

    […] Party (a document from whose precursor, the Revolutionary Communist Tendency, is available here in the […]

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: David Miller Wed, 03 Nov 2010 11:02:18

    Here is the RCP manfesto – or should I say ‘programme’, from 1983/4. Titled ‘Preparing for Power’. http://www.scribd.com/doc/40531387/Preparing-for-Power-RCP-3rd-Ed-Aug-1984

    Lots more on this lot here: http://www.powerbase.info/index.php?title=Revolutionary_Communist_Tendency

    Reminiscences and information gratefully received: David@spinwatch.org

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Left Archive: The Next Step – Revolutionary Communist Party [UK], May 1987 « The Cedar Lounge Revolution Mon, 19 Sep 2011 06:38:03

    […] Communist Party in May 1987. The RCP emerged from the Revolutionary Communist Tendency [see here] which itself had emerged from the Revolutionary Communist Group [see here]. The RCP had a […]

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Steve Palmer Sun, 02 Feb 2014 14:53:51

    In reply to Kieran.

    The RCP was NOT NOT NOT formed from a split with the RCT.
    Here is the full sequence.

    There was a split from the International Socialists (now the splintering SWP) which called itself the ‘Revolutionary Opposition’. John Sullivan’s (highly tendentious account, but amusing) account of what lay behind that split can be found at
    http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/revhist/otherdox/whatnext/tearsite.html

    That amorphous group (RO) wandered in the wilderness for a while. Younger participants chaffed at the bit, wanting to get on and build something. Others, older (even dressed older – looked like 40 yr old school teachers, although still in their 20s) wanted to suckle at the nipple of Pure Trotskyism in the shape of Roy Tearse, a former industrial organizer for the (original) RCP in the ’40s. So the RO itself split. The younger participants went ahead and set up the RCG which remained, and remains, the RCG.

    Without going into all the details, a group around Frank Furedi was thrown out for chauvinism. This became the RCT, which then evolved into the RCP.

    Reply on the CLR

  • By: Steve Palmer Sun, 02 Feb 2014 14:55:35

    In reply to Nick.

    Lol. Nonsense. And actionable. Cops just love this kind of gossipy shit.

    Reply on the CLR