The Cedar Lounge Revolution

Left Archive: An Phoblacht, Numbers 9 and 10, Irish Revolutionary Forces, January 1967 and Mar-Apr 1967. August 25, 2014

To download the above documents please click on the following links: An Phoblacht No.10 Mar-Apr. 1967

An Phoblacht No.9 Jan. 1967 And…

To go to the Left Archive please click here.

Many thanks to Jim Lane for donating two more issues of An Phoblacht – The Republic from Irish Revolutionary Forces. It is intended to have a complete set of this important document in the Archive. It is also important to note how useful this document is in tracing – from a critical perspective, changing attitudes within Republicanism and Sinn Féin and the IRA during the late 1960s. That it was positioned critically in relation to Sinn Féin and the IRA is of particular importance offering a distinctively different view into the changes in those organisations.

As always it is probably most useful to quote briefly from both editions.

The Editorial in number 9, from January, makes the point that many who are antagonistic to the then direction of the Republican Movement had no assisted in contributing to a larger paper than An Phoblacht, and it argues that:

…we must again stress that our attacks are against certain lines of policy which are being openly pushed by a specific clique of people’ and that at no time have we dwelt on maters detrimental to the security of any undertaking against the Partitionist regimes.

And it continues:

The Republican Movement is not an Irish version of the Mafia, you know; it is a political organisation responsible to the people it claims to represent. And this business of keeping one’s mouth shut, while the fortunes of Republicanism go to the dogs, has been prevalent for far too long already amongst Republicans.

Other articles in this edition include one asking will Clann na hEireann be ‘sold-out’ in relation to ‘throwing their lot in with the British Communist Party’? Another argues that ‘talk of ‘constitutional action’ emanates strongly through the backdoor of the ‘Sinn Féin Club’’, while a third notes the establishment of a Wolfe Tone Society in Cork and asks ‘who are these people?’. Another argues that a ‘big-sell out [is] on the way from the Republican Movement’.

Intriguingly it also dismisses the idea put about by some that ‘we ‘claim force as a principle..’ and that if we ‘could get Ireland free without force (we) wouldn’t accept it’, and it notes that ‘Force is the mailed fist of revolutionary principles; but it is not, and never can be, a revolutionary principle in itself…’.

It concludes with the thought that ‘the Republican movement is presently in the hands of interlopers’.

Other articles in this edition include one asking will Clann na hEireann be ‘sold-out’ in relation to ‘throwing their lot in with the British Communist Party’? Another argues that ‘talk of ‘constitutional action’ emanates strongly through the backdoor of the ‘Sinn Féin Club’’, while a third notes the establishment of a Wolfe Tone Society in Cork and asks ‘who are these people?’. Another argues that a ‘big-sell out [is] on the way from the Republican Movement’.

One very interesting feature of March-April issue Number 10 is the cover, which as noted inside the document ‘is a reprint of the Proclamation issued by the Provisional Government during the rising of ’67. It is an important document which is not without significance. It is a pity it is not better known to Republicans.’

The Editorial continues this theme and notes:

This year it is again our duty to commemorate yet another Rising which marks the progress of the Irish Revolution. A century ago, on March 5, 1867, brave men ventured forth to win an objective first crystallised in the ideology of Irish Republicanism as it was formulated by the revolutionary leadership of the Untied Irishman. The men of ’67 lost the battle, it is true… but as Col. T.J. Kelly Chief Executive of the IRB… wrote… ‘Our movement is only commencing, and it is not about to finish. I speak,’ he wrote, ‘in the name of all proletarian Ireland’.

It takes Republican publications to task on their lack of focus and ‘derogatory treatment accorded’ the Fenians whose ‘aim to organise a military coup’ is contrasted by the RM with ‘Parnell’s parliamentarianism… which had a revolutionary purpose: to make it impossible for the Westminster Parliament to function unless Irish demands were conceded’. It further criticises the RM for arguing that the ‘banner of agrarian revolt… was not picked up by the Fenians’. Indeed the editorial argues that the Fenians were ‘far to the left’ of Lalor on the issue of the ‘land question’.

The piece concludes by arguing that Ireland has not had a bourgeoise revolution and that it cannot have one – and it asks that when asked to pass judgement on the Fenians it be kept in mind that a century of experience has passed.

This edition also contains a report from the Clann na hEireann Ard Fheis, a piece by Eoin McDonaill looks at ‘Revolution vs. Reform: The Battle Now Being Waged’.

There is a piece on the IRA badge and how apparently ‘Dublin’ ‘refuses to supply this badge any longer’. And there’s a scathing piece on The United Irishman.

Left Archive: An Phoblacht published by Irish Revolutionary Forces (Cork 1966). January 28, 2013

To download the above file please click on the following link: Road-Revolution-Ireland

Many thanks to Jim Lane for the following document. He has appended a postscript, please see below.

This document first appeared in serial form in 1966 AP and was reprinted as a booklet/pamphlet in the early 1980. The Irish Revolutionary Forces was a group of former IRA members and activists in the Cork area who sought a more leftward and activist approach by the IRA. Some of the activities of the IRF are detailed on this wiki page.

The IRF later became Saor Éire (the Cork based group, not the Dublin based one) and were responsible for People’s Voice (see here in the Left Archive).

This document, the Road to Revolution in Ireland, outlines in some detail the approach of the IRF to the issues facing the left and Republicans in the Ireland of the 1960s. This is dealt with sections under specific headings including: Revolution, Revolutionary Programme, Revolutionary Policy, Power Policy, Reconstruction Policy and Revolutionary Action. Each sections outlines aspects of the problems being faced.

For example, in the first section on Revolution, it is noted that:

…it is obvious that the Irish Revolution must be a two-phased effort. The first, must be aimed primarily at the overthrow of the Partitionist regime, and the seizure of state power by the revolutionary movement. The second, must represent a co-ordinated national effort during which the national community, under the leadership of the revolutionary movement, will undertake the reconstruction of the nation on completely new lines.

And it emphasises that the revolution cannot halt at the completion of the first phase.

In relation to the Revolutionary Programme it argues that:

A truly revolutionary programme for Ireland must, of necessity, be diametrically opposed to the existing order of things, this is only logical; and since Ireland now functions according to the dictates of capitalism, then, it is but common sense to suggest that an Irish
revolutionary movement must found it’s programme on the principles of Revolutionary Socialism. There exists no other known alternative.

The section on Revolutionary Policy suggests that:

…[such programmes] illustrate a great weakness among contemporary Irish Revolutionaries; that is, the tendency to confuse policies for a programme, and therefore to confuse principles with strategic and tactical expediencies. An Irish revolutionary programme must be based on the destruction of the neo-colonial system, and the construction of a new socialist order.

Interestingly the document argues that ‘the use of force’ and participation in ‘the arena of parliamentary politics’ are ‘purely a matter of policy’.

When discussing Power Policy, the point is made that:

Of necessity, a revolutionary movement, must, from the outset regulate it’s policies on the premise that force will have to be used in the struggle for power. Both precedent and ordinary common sense points to the realism of this stand.

On Reconstruction Policy it asserts that:

Policies governing the country’s reconstruction, along lines compatible to the principles of Socialism, are of tremendous importance. Indeed, there are many cases where the revolutionary forces experienced success on the battle fired, only to lose their way when it came to the implementation of the social, political and economic changes that justified their existence in the first place.

And it continues:

The great need is to demonstrate over and over, that this business of revolution cannot be reduced to such relatively simple terms, a learning how to use a gun, and then taking off to take a shot at a target e.g., U.D.R., or the likes; Revolution represents political action under the most demanding of conditions; it is a haven neither for fools, rogues or adventurers.

Finally in a consideration of Revolutionary Action it points to the 1956 campaign as an example of one in which there ‘existed no programme that we know of… consequently it is difficult to determine what the I.R.A. was actually fighting to establish as an alternative to what it was trying to destroy’. And by contrast it argues that ‘the I.R.A. leadership of 1933 issued one of the very few revolutionary programmes that has ever emanated from an Irish revolutionary movement’.

All told a very useful document from an organisation of great interest.

When offering us this document for insertion in the Archive, Jim Lane stated:

“I would be delighted if the contents of this document, were to be read and studied, by those who today are generally refereed to as ‘dissidents’. It presents them with a check-list document , to help them to evaluate where they stand when compared to the positions required by the The Road to Revolution in Ireland today. As I see the situation today, they will inevitably be drawn to the conclusion that those who took time out, in the early 60’s to analyse where they were going, had done the correct thing. For them the obvious advise in this document, calls out to the ‘dissidents’ to call a halt to their military campaign. I am and always have been aware, that many republicans always confuse mention of politics with parliamentry politics and usually believe that that is where they are being led, when urged to put down the bomb and gun. There are many other ways to advance their cause outside of parliament, if that happens to be their main objection. Many ways to highlight what they want for today’s Ireland. Hopefully, they will take some advise from the Irish Revolutionary Forces of the 1960’s and Read and Study”