My Review of Larry Bond's 1991 Anti-Apartheid Novel "Vortex"

In a book report (it wasn’t very analytical) I did in 2022 about a sort of sci-fi/sort of techno-thriller novel with a left-wing message, I admitted that a big chunk of the fiction I read is by Tom Clancy or authors like Tom Clancy (1989-2009 it was about 70% and since 2009 it’s been about 25% (hopefully I won’t go to Socialist Hell)). As far as I can tell, the author of the book I just referred to (David Mace) is progressive. If you look at the books I’ve read in the Tom Clancy genre there’s a handful with some stuff that is liberal or even progressive. It’s usually a small island of progressive viewpoints (by characters you’re supposed to like) with an ocean of center/center-right politics. There is one book which is written by someone much more right-wing than left-wing but which can nonetheless be greatly enjoyed politically by progressives, if you think about it the right way. I’m talking about Larry Bond’s 1991 novel “Vortex.”

“Vortex” is about Apartheid South Africa, and a “last gasp” attempt by hardliners to maintain Apartheid and Afrikaner colonialism. I believe the story starts in May of 1992, although it’s not clear what the year is. I am not sure how much or how little progress was made in the Peace Process between Mandela’s release and May of 1992 (in reality). Towards the very beginning of the book the President of SA talks about significant progress being made, which prompts the main villain (Karl Vorster, a Cabinet member) to carry out something which is basically a coup, but which appears to be the ANC’s military wing (MK) assassinating the rest of the cabinet (although this is known by almost no one until the last 1/3 of the book, the MK operation was manipulated by Vorster and the Intelligence agency he runs). He then reverses the small number of reforms that had been made to Apartheid, invades neighboring Namibia, and turns the security forces loose against Blacks and any dissent by whites.

The situation becomes chaotic. The leader of the Zulu population (who, in reality, may not have been as militant as the ANC was during the anti-Apartheid struggle) calls for the rest of the world to take action against the new regime and his people take up armed struggle. A large chunk of the military in Cape Town refuses to massacre white civilian protestors and rebels against the government.

Things also start to fall apart for Vorster in Namibia, whose government asks the Cuban Army in Angola to help repel the invasion. Although this is more complicated, to one extent or another during most of the book you can root for the Cuban Army. The head of the Cuban Army in Africa (General Antonio Vega) convinces Castro that Cuba should resolve the conflict by invading South Africa and overthrowing Apartheid. With some help from other “anti-Imperialist” countries (including three Libyan units probably the size of battalions) three columns (probably around 2,000-3,000 men in each) enter SA from the east, north and west. Because the Cubans hid their preparations for the invasion the SA military is still focused on Namibia and rapid progress is made, especially the column approaching Pretoria from the West. Because it is a desert and a sparely populated area (and because he is psychotic) Vorster eradicates that column with a nuclear bomb. SA is on the verge of using two more nukes to attack strategic targets when the US military captures them and removes them from the country in a massive airborne operation. Shortly after that the US military lands something like a division on the east coast of SA (at Durban) and starts fighting the SA Army on it’s way to Pretoria. Naval aircraft start attacking the East column of Cubans.

As you might guess, the US military stops the Cubans from reaching Pretoria until they (the US) can get there first. The aftermath of this victory for the US is largely a GOP fantasy. Because of some significant friction with the Cubans (see below), the ANC abandons it’s commitment to socialism. There IS something about recognition of the trade-unions, something proposed by the occupying US military, but I think we’re talking about something that is probably engineered to foster a pretty centrist labor movement.

There are two large aspects of this story relevant to how close it is to being a progressive book.

First, the US government moves very slowly at each stage of the crisis and are usually far behind Cuba. And they (characters who are officials of the US government) are pretty honest about why they are initially very slow and behind Cuba, and they’re also very honest about why they DO send their own invasion force after Cuba invades- they don’t want Cuba to get credit for overthrowing Apartheid. I will add a lot of details to this in about a year when I read this book (for the 6th or 7th time) and take some notes, but in general, Cuba looks better than the US government.

On the other hand, there are some things Bond has the Cubans do that A) usually involve quite a bit of imagination on Bond’s part and B) make Cuba look bad. After one of his columns is wiped out by a nuke, Vega decides to compensate for that by using chemical weapons. In all fairness to Vega and in all fairness to Bond who was probably tempted to really slander Cuba at this point, they use NON-PERSISTENT chemical weapons which become impotent pretty quickly after they are released into the air. This means they’re not quite as indiscriminate as they would be if they were persistent. We don’t know how many battles involved Cuban chemical weapons, but there was at least one. And some small part of the nearby black population was affected, with some deaths.

Those black deaths contribute to the erosion of congeniality between the Cuban Army and the ANC’s military wing, Spear of the Nation. There is one bizarre incident that was a pretty good example of Bond trying to reassure most of his readers that he did not go commie while writing this book. The Cubans ask the black population in one town to help them make an airfield they took over functional again. There weren’t enough volunteers so a small number of Blacks were forced to help. This of course contributes to the conflict developing between the Cubans and the ANC. Bond does sort zig-zag a bit and quotes Vega’s thoughts, pointing out that he has Black officers on his staff- who he describes as brave and competent.

There is something I really need to say about Bond. Vortex is his second book. His first and third books are politically fairly centrist overall. His fourth and fifth books, I thought were racist towards Muslims and I will never read them again and I haven’t read anything he wrote after book five. (see this and this (and look for my name)). (I lost track of those two novels in my collection for several years but in the end I made a decision about 5 years ago to throw them away instead of taking them to a thrift store (I’m not totally okay with that, because it resembles book burning, but throwing them away was probably the right thing to do))

There is one last thing I need to get out of the way. In the very first sentence of the book, in a section that includes maybe 500 words, it sounds like Bond is saying that rural, uneducated Zimbabweans think that helicopters flying at night are “demons.”  There’s a bit more to that short first section, and I also think after I explain this next part, progressive readers will feel comfortable assuming that Bond is not racist towards Black people. In his first book (about a second Korean War), one of the main characters is an Air Force pilot who gets shot down behind enemy lines, and is rescued at night by a helicopter. This character does say that the helicopter appears like a demon.

It’s a massive book- 896 pages in paperback. If you’re not totally against anything military and you hate Apartheid, you will probably like this book. In about a year I will probably read it again and take some notes and have more to say.

My Position on Ukraine

As I’ll explain below, I basically support Ukraine. I don’t see a Nazi problem there any more serious than what most white countries have, I don’t see why it’s so important for Russia to intervene in support of the the Russia population in Ukraine, I find Putin offensive for various reasons, etc. However I am also concerned about a war starting between the US and Russia.

About 40% of my info for this is from CNN, about 40% is from NPR, and the rest is miscellaneous stuff including Dave Anderson’s column.

1. I have heard almost nothing about a current problem with Nazis in Ukraine. According to Dave Anderson in the Boulder Weekly, the Nazis are no longer politically significant. I DID read on CNN.com about a battalion of the Ukrainian military that is more right-wing than most military units. But I got the impression it was also not very significant. I have read that the President of Ukraine is Jewish, probably less than 100%. And although it’s not a good sign for him that I feel a need to say this, I get the impression he is okay with people of color (he recently addressed some body of the African Union and met with his counterpart from Indonesia). I have read of Putin making vague references to Nazism in Ukraine, but they’re incredibly vague. I have heard some stuff making me think that RUSSIA is the one with the Nazi problem.
2. I have heard almost nothing about Russian-speaking people being oppressed in Ukraine. I’m not sure what to think of what happened with Viktor Yanukovych. I don’t remember exactly what happened, but everything else I have read indicates that Ukraine is a healthy democracy and aside from the thing about Yanukovych I have not heard of anything about the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine being oppressed.
3. I don’t believe that NATO expansion explains what Putin is doing to Ukraine and I’m certain it doesn’t justify it. Putin has been acting like an imperialist- taking little bits here and there into his State or at least his spheres of influence- parts of Georgia, then a part of Ukraine and now more of Ukraine.
4. I cannot understand why anyone would blame the Ukrainian people for fighting back. At least some part of that population is going to be under the rule of a foreign nation, a foreign nation that has shown zero respect for the Ukrainian people (what Putin said shortly before the invasion, and what his forces have been doing as part of the invasion). I can only imagine how horrible that is.
5. I don’t like Putin. Last I heard, about 15-20 years ago, he made governors in Russia appointed instead of elected. He’s friendly with Trump. He’s incredibly homophobic. In general he seems pretty repulsive to me. My hope is that if the Ukraine invasion is too costly (in economic and military terms) it might weaken Putin.

6. Practically every European country that is not Russia is in NATO. And some of the exceptions are in the EU which is also supporting Ukraine. Critics of Biden’s Ukraine policy have been out-voted by almost all of Europe that is not Russia. They are worried about Russian aggression.

I realize what I just wrote might not change many minds. I’ve only been reading about 1,000 words a day about the conflict and related issues and in earlier years I am sure I missed a lot of relevant stuff. But I do support Ukraine.

I AM worried about the US getting into a war with Russia. In fact, in 2016 I told 1-3 people that Russia was the only issue where I preferred Trump over Clinton (I voted for Clinton (there were enough serious problems with Trump (i.e. he accepted support from David Duke) that I ignored the fact CO is not a swing state and failed to vote for a good 3rd party)). I can’t believe that Zelensky repeatedly asked for a no-fly zone and I’m really glad that Biden answered with a firm NO. I think the US can help Ukraine defend itself and at the same time avoid a conflict with Russia (Vietnam didn't become WWIII and neither did Afghanistan in the 1980s). Although I ended up looking a little stupid with that book review about nuclear war, the tension between the US and Russia is one of the reasons I am trying to promote the book and discussion about nuclear war.

Tom

Movie Reviews B

Emperor (IMDB Wikipedia)

I’m not sure how historically accurate it is, but overall it’s a fairly good movie. I’m glad that we defeated Japan in that war and it’s great that afterwards we became friends with Japan.  I also liked how one character, a senior Japanese politician who got along with the allies, pointed out that the British and Americans were roughly as imperialistic as Imperial Japan was.

I give it 2 stars out of 5.

Dr. Strange (IMDB Wikipedia)

Not anything political in this movie, but I do like super-hero stuff. I focus mostly on DC Comics stuff, but I also watch the live action movies about Marvel super-heroes.

I give it 2 stars out of five.

The Best of Enemies (IMDB Wikipedia)

This is an amazing movie. It’s a true story about a KKK leader rejecting racism. I missed the very ending when I saw it in the theater, but when I watched it at home recently, I learned that after CP Ellis transformed, he worked as a union organizer for the AFL-CIO. In general I was a little surprised at how class-conscious the Klan leader is but not that surprised. Obviously we have plenty of reasons to fight racism, but there’s one more- a lot of racists will become progressives when they reject their racist beliefs. And we need to recognize the role that unions have to play in fighting racism, as I’ve written elsewhere on this blog. We need to convince fiscally moderate and conservative Dems to support unions as a way to combat racism.

I give it 5 stars out of 5.

Easy A (IMDB Wikipedia)

This movie is about a teenage girl who lies about having sex for various reasons- for example a gay boy gets her to lie about them having sex so that he won’t be outed. She  kind of enjoys having an (inaccurate) reputation as a promiscuous young woman, but she also says towards the end that she doesn’t know when she’ll lose her virginity- but that it might be the next day or it might be on her wedding night or somewhere in between.

I give it 5 stars out of 5.

The Color of Freedom (also known as “Goodbye Bafana") (IMDB Wikipedia)

It’s based on a true story, although I’m not sure how historically accurate it is. It’s inspirational to see a racist journey through life to a point where he is friends with Nelson Mandela. This movie also highlighted the fact that Mandela was a driving force behind the armed part of the ANC’s strategy. In all honesty, the ANC’s military wing did a better job of not killing civilians than the IRA did, but the IRA wasn’t too far behind the ANC as I explain here.

The Palestinain-Israeli Peace Process is Over

I just sort of stumbled onto a news story about something I had been largely ignoring for about 2 months. The Peace Process between Israel and the Palestinians is over. Read this. I have done two important posts about this issue. One is about how the term "Apartheid" is an appropriate description of how Israel treats the Palestinians, and one is an argument against zionism.

A good source of information about the conflict is here. For a more frequently updated and relatively neutral source, see The Times of Israel.

Tom

Taking Down Columbus: Three New Poems

I explain about my poetry here. The second is based on a song I agree with. The other two are not. The third one is about anti-racist skinheads. You might want to read the notes about that kind of poem here.

All the poems are available by clicking on the "lyrics" label at the bottom.

1. Indigenous Peoples Day. Opposition to Columbus Day Parades.
2. A Letter From Ardoyne To British Labour. An appeal by a Northern Ireland Catholic to the British Labour Party.
3. Taking Down the Boneheads. Anti-racist skinheads.

“Indigenous Peoples Day” based on “Freedom” by Brutal Attack. Original lyrics are here.

1. This is about opposition to Columbus Day parades, from the perspective of a white ally, but not me (frankly, I LOVE those parades- just joking; the thing is, I practically never or never write from my perspective when I use the first person in my poems; in this case, the last line of the first verse is not something I have done)). For multiple reasons, you should read several paragraphs here, beginning a little more than 1/2 way down, starting with the paragraph “For many reasons…” and ending with the paragraph “For whatever it’s worth….” You should definitely read some of the material here.
2. Although this is about such parades nation-wide, in Denver at least, the group organizing the parade is or has been the Sons of Columbus (there seem to be groups using that phrase throughout the country) (UPDATE 3/27/20 It's been 15-20 years and I was wrong- in Denver it was the Sons of Italy, but the other phrase, in connection with the word parade, IS found all over the internet).
3. When Columbus was governor of Hispanola (today Haiti and the Dominican Republic), at least 99% of the indigenous population was killed.
4. I mentioned Irish-Americans for three reasons:

A: We’re awesome.

B: In the last 20 years or so, frequently local organizations of the Ancient Order of Hibernians (an exclusively male, Catholic and Irish-American group) have marched in Columbus Day Parades (see the very end of an article here). They’re more or less conservative (some are economically progressive) and this just pisses me off even more.

C: I think that sometimes Sinn Fein should intervene in American political fights considering A) how internationalist they are and B) how much time they spend here. Considering how Columbus Day parades stand for something worse than Orange Order parades, and the fact that many of their supporters are MARCHING in Columbus Day parades, I think it’s one of the few times that SF should speak out, IN AMERICA, about injustice here.

5. This isn’t written from MY perspective. But here’s a little story relevant to the last line of the first verse. After the controversy about Ward Churchill broke, I attended a rally and/or protest in support of him. I was wearing an anti-Columbus t-shirt and some College Republican said that Columbus was his hero. I explained what I mentioned above about Hispanola and the GOPer said that when he moved into his apartment he wiped out the “indigenous population of spiders.” I should have explained how offensive it is to compare that with killing brown-skinned people, but I just called him a motherfucker. He asked if I wanted to fight and then speculated that I don’t believe in fighting (I’m not a pacifist). I just stood there looking at the rest of the crowd until he’d been silent for 2-3 minutes and then I walked away.
6. As far as the FBI, in the 1970s the American Indian Movement was targeted for destruction by the FBI (exclusively or almost exclusively on Pine Ridge). On the Pine Ridge reservation, 1973-1976, the US government and its corrupt reservation allies were responsible for the murder of at least 69 AIM members and supporters (according to the chapter “AIM Casualties on Pine Ridge” in Ward Churchill’s 1994 book “Indians Are Us?”). The population of that reservation I would estimate was, at the time, about 20,000 (I can’t find anything for that, and according to the US Census Bureau via Wikipedia, in 2017 there were almost 20,000 people there, and between the fact that it was likely 1/2 of 1/3 that in 1975 and the fact that I have found some confusing facts indicating that it may be higher than 20,000 today, I’m just going to go with 20,000). In The Troubles, five years that saw 200+ deaths each year were 1972-1976 and since 1972 saw 480 deaths in the conflict, I looked at the years 1972-1975. During that time, almost exactly 422 members of the Nationalist community, including members of republican paramilitaries (including three from the South who were killed in the North; I mention that because I’m sure some AIM members on Pine Ridge were not locals), were killed by either the security forces or loyalist paramilitaries. Now, when considering population figures, if things were equal in terms of these sorts of deaths, the figure for N. Ireland would have been 1,725 (for good reason, I looked at just Pine Ridge and on the other hand, all of N. Ireland). I should also point out that AIM was not as militant as the IRA, and as far as I know, killed none or almost none of their opponents and probably ZERO civilians, and were not blowing up buildings. If they had been more aggressive and/or had killed civilians, I can only imagine how many of them and their supporters would have been killed (there’s evidence that around 90% of the Nationalist community, including republicans, supported republican paramilitaries TO ONE DEGREE OR ANOTHER, see the middle third of this for support of internees in the 1970s and hunger-strikers in 1981). UPDATE 12/19/20 I just got an email from Churchill saying that the population of Pine ridge at the time was about 10,000, so instead of 1,725 the hypothetical figure for N. Ireland is 3, 450.
7. In the last 25 years I celebrated the 4th 3-6 times. A) I have some slightly patriotic tendencies and B) I was hanging out with friends who were more or less liberal or my Mom who was (overall) fairly liberal. But I’m sure that most white allies who oppose these parades don’t celebrate the 4th and I agree that some of what it is symbolic of is fucked up shit.
8. Columbus may have been Italian, although according to Ward Churchill there’s some disagreement about that. MANY Italian-Americans (around 60-90 years ago), in response to bigotry against them, started talking up the idea that Columbus was Italian and began celebrating him. At a 2000 talk in support of a protest of the Denver Columbus Day parade, Ward Churchill said that there SHOULD be a celebration of Italian-America, but based on pasta, not Columbus. Sacco and Vanzetti were Italian immigrants and anarchists convicted of murder in 1921 during a wave of anti-immigrant, anti-Italian, and anti-anarchist hysteria in America. It’s widely agreed that there’s plenty of reason to believe they were innocent.
9. Police body cams make it less likely that they’ll do fucked up shit. There should be some kind of serious penalty for the officers and/or department if they claim that the footage isn’t available (it wasn’t turned on, it broke, the computer doesn’t work, whatever their excuse is).
10. **80% of this version is me, 20% is the original.
11. This is dedicated to my late friend Chris O’Laughlin, who died of cancer in 2002. He was very progressive, and an opponent of these parades, and was Irish-American and Italian-American (and probably proud of both- I know he was an Irish Republican). RIP Chris.
12. UPDATE 3/27/20 I'm not real familiar with to what degree American Indians live communally today, especially those who live off the reservation, but A) I think that continues to one degree or another today and B) only about 150 years ago around 1/3-1/2 DEFINITELY lived communally and C) 300 years before that, they all definitely did and D) it's something that many Indians, to one degree or another, aspire to.
13. UPDATE 3/28/20 In case I need to clarify this, here it is. I have said, explicitly, in at least two other places on my blog, that I would feel better if there hadn't been any European settlement here at all. I mentioned westward expansion  for two reasons: A) A LOT of the time people focus on criticizing "Manifest Destiny" (the idea behind westward expansion) and B) the settlement of the 13 colonies was not something done by the government I recognize as mine, it was done by the British. But I DO feel bad about the settlement of the 13 colonies.
14. UPDATE 4/9/20 I imply in the poem that all American Indians want the parades banned. I'm not sure that's totally true. About 10 years ago an Indian I was friends with said she wasn't into the idea of blocking the parade. That might extend to getting it banned. But among Indians who oppose blocking it, there might be some or many who are sort of okay with it being banned by the city. In Denver I had been to a few other protests organized by the group (or the main group) that organized the protest of the parade (Colorado AIM) and was slightly familiar with the Denver American Indian community and I think that maybe around 1/3 or 1/2 of Indians in that area identified with them (most of the others hated them). It's possible that if the others opposed blocking the parade, for some of them it was because CO-AIM got in front of opposition to the parade at the very beginning, and like I said, a lot of Indians in Denver really don't like them (that might be because they’re fairly comfortable, in theory and at least once in practice, with militancy, and without being Marxist or social-democratic or anarchist, CO-AIM could be described, to one degree or another, as leftist). And if some people would say that the issue of freedom of assembly would indicate opposition to the parade being banned, I would say that it seems pretty popular among Indians to tell sports teams what they can do with their “Indian” mascots. The Native American Rights Fund, a group more moderate than CO-AIM, supported at least one lawsuit and supports creating a legislatively created and empowered committee in CO that would have the power of the law to approve or reject the mascots of public schools (including higher education). The streets are public, and Columbus Day is probably more offensive to American Indians than “Indian” mascots are. In any case, something like 99% of American Indians don't like the parades.

When the Sons of Italy want to march the city won’t ban it
But take a look at the genocide, Columbus began it
Now they’re afraid of us because we tell the truth
To the masses of white people, including the Irish-American youth
When I think about America’s westward expansion I feel some shame
But when I stand to make a speech the police ask me for my name

Chorus
Freedom from genocide is the very least they deserve
Capitalism and Imperialism joined forces, two things we should not conserve
The White man can try to suppress Indians with their police and the FBI
Indians will emerge victors- and fuck the 4th of July!

Communal Nations with a lot of respect for the land       
They’ll keep working until Columbus Day parades are banned
We don’t hate Italians-Americans and remember Sacco and Vanzetti
As Ward said, let’s celebrate Italian-America with a ton of spaghetti

So, let’s help promote the next protest against those parades
If we have to, we’ll keep doing this for many decades
We want a country free of bigotry, and based on community
We believe in police body cams and equal opportunity

**********

“A Letter From Ardoyne To British Labour” based on “Body Count” by Body Count (Ice-T’s heavy metal band). Original lyrics are here.

1. I removed a lot of Ice-T’s non lyrical talk, except for the very beginning.
2. Ardoyne is a nationalist/republican neighborhood in North Belfast.
3. This is basically in late 1970 and 1971, after British Labour were removed from power by the voters and yet, close enough to the beginning of the conflict that you could say the republican struggle was still growing, and when Orange is definitely the right word because Stormont, the Unionist-dominated regional devolved Parliament and Government, still existed.
4. As far as I can tell, there are some pro-unionist tendencies in BL, some pro-republican tendencies, some pro-SDLP tendencies (although officially they’re sister organizations, the SDLP doesn’t belong in the Socialist International and I think a lot of people in BL know that (that post also explains how, setting aside the question of the IRA’s campaign, getting behind the SDLP was not getting behind an effective path to equality, justice and freedom for the Nationalist population)), and some other tendencies (i.e. some wanted Labour to organize in the North, but British Labour, not Irish Labour).
5. The red, white and blue, in this poem and not the original lyrics, refers to the BRITISH flag.
6. Partition is the division of Ireland.
7. Orange is the color of anti-Catholic bigotry in the Anglo-Irish context.
8. The BA is the British Army.
9. AKs are AK-47s which are automatic rifles.
10. RA stands for “Republican Army” and is pronounced “raw.”
11. Loyalist refers to the paramilitaries that focused mostly on killing Catholic civilians because they were Catholic.
12. Squaddie is a British soldier.
13. I choose North Belfast because, behind West Belfast, it saw the most deaths in the conflict (compared to the other 3 quarters of Belfast, Derry, and Counties Armagh, Down, Antrim, Derry, Fermanagh, and Tyrone). But I think it was worse for Catholics in North Belfast than those in West Belfast because it was a mixture of Nationalist and Unionist areas, whereas the Nationalist areas of West Belfast were all grouped together.
14. **25% of this version is me, 75% is the original.
15. I have calculated that only about .3% of the IRA's operations resulted in civilian death.

You know, sometimes I sit at home, you know, and I watch the BBC
And I wonder what it would be like to live in some place like
You know, Manchester, Liverpool
You know, where the peelers come and got your cat outta the tree
All your friends die of old age
But you see.. I live in North Belfast
And unfortunately... SHIT AIN'T LIKE THAT!!
It's real fucked up!

God damn, what brothers and sisters gotta do
To get a message through
To the red and white and blue
What? I gotta die, before you realize
I was a person with open eyes?
Partition’s insane, while you drink champagne
And I'm living under Orange reign
The BA fears Irish people with AKs
Here the ‘RA's got ten stashed With a case of hand grenades

You'd know what to do
If loyalists killed your kid on the way to school
Or a BA sniper shot your kid in a rural barnyard
Shit would hit the fan motherfucker and it would hit real hard
I hear it every night, another gun fight
The struggle mounts,
on with the IRA’s squaddie Body Count

God damn what the Irish gotta do
To get a message through
To the red and white and you?
What? I gotta die before you realize
I was a Catholic with open eyes?
Orange society’s insane, while you drink champagne
And I'm living under Imperialistic reign
Don't you hear the loyalist guns?
You stupid, dumb British Labour politicians!!

*************

“Taking on the Boneheads” based on “Tearing Down the Flags” by Razor’s Edge. Original lyrics are here.

1.  This is about anti-racist skinheads. They might not exist anymore, but that’s not going to stop me from doing poems like this.
2. Bonehead is an anti-racist term for nazi skinhead.
3. Cardiff (Wales) is the home of Roddy Moreno and the Oi! band The Oppressed are based there. Moreno is the most popular anti-racist skinhead in the world.
4. Las Vegas is where in 1998, two anti-racist skinheads were killed by Nazis.
5. A large town in the Czech Republic is where, in 2008, an anti-racist skinhead was killed by a Nazi Skinhead.
6. Perth (Australia) rhymes with Earth.
7. Anti-racist skinheads are embarrassed (or something like that) by the existence of Nazis in their culture.
8. SHARP stands for “SkinHead Against Racial Prejudice.”
9. Fash is short for fascists.
10. Suss is a skinhead/British word for intelligence (or something close to that).
11. Around 95% of skinheads are working-class and even when it’s warped by fascism, have a strong sense of working-class pride.
12. The idea is that, since the skinhead culture started in connection with Black English people, if you’re a racist you can’t be a skinhead.
13. Bread is a term for economic justice. Although the average SHARP is only sort of political and only sort of progressive, Nazi skinheads are, for better or worse, very political and have a (racially narrow) belief in economic justice.
14. Ian Stuart was the opposite of Moreno, and died in 1993 in a hilarious car accident.
15. I think the fash (and, sort of separately, the Christian Right) try to ignore the way they have a lot in common with the Muslim fundamentalist Right (if you think I have a racist double standard, see the first third of this).
16. I don’t believe in Hell, but if it does exist Ian Stuart and Al-Qaeda members are there.
17. A patch on, for example, a bomber jacket (popular with skinheads).
18. Docs are Doc Martens, boots that almost all skinheads (and some non-skinhead fans of music that inspires moshing) wear (it’s possible that in the last 20 years, a LOT of other people are wearing them, too).
19. **63% of this poem is me, 37% is the original.

They wear their swastika patches, their symbols full of hate
Don't they f*cking realize, that their defeat awaits
We're taking on the boneheads, all across the Earth
In Cardiff, Las Vegas, the Czech Republic and Perth

(Chorus)
We're taking down the boneheads- we'll banish Skinhead’s shame.
We're taking down the boneheads- SHARP is our name.
We're taking down the boneheads- we’re never giving in.
We're taking down the boneheads- we’re gonna f*cking win.

Fash still marching on our streets, they haven't learned a thing.
Don't they f*cking realize, our fists will swing and they’ll swing and they’ll swing
They're just a bunch of wankers, who haven’t got the suss
To the skinhead culture and the working-class they’re treasonous

They shave their heads and wear Docs but they aren’t real skinheads
They don’t realize you can’t promote hate and successfully push for bread
We're taking down the boneheads, and we hate Ian Stuart real well.
So they can join Al-Qaeda, in the fascist motherfuckers hell

"The Connolly/Larkin Brigade" A New Poem!

A new poem. I explain how I write my poems here. This one is based on a song that I like politically. For the rest of the poems, click on the "lyrics" label at the bottom.


"The Connolly/Larkin Brigade," based on “Last Lincoln Veteran” by David Rovics. Original lyrics are here.

PLEASE READ!! 1. This is a bizarre one. It’s about a very alternate history. Written from the perspective of an American socialist in, about, 2040, it’s about fictional events in the 1980s, (which is similar to the chronological perspective of the original (the original was written about 65-70 years after the events in it, when there were still some Lincoln veterans alive)).
It’s based on a song about the anti-fascist foreigners who fought in the Spanish Civil War (there was an Irish anti-fascist contingent, largely ex-IRA members, called the Connolly Column). The premise of this poem is that at some point in the 1980s, a similar call is made for people to fight in the North of Ireland. It IS possible that if the IRA had a launched a Tet-style offensive (in the Vietnam War, there was the Tet Offensive by the VietCong in 1968) as they had planned to in the 1980s, the conflict would have been transformed and it would have made sense to call for large numbers of foreign fighters.
3. James Connolly and Jim Larkin were senior or semi-senior leaders of the broad Irish republican family in the first 2-3 decades of the last century. Both spent time as union organizers in America.
4. May 1st is International Workers Day.
5. Dixieland is a racist term for the American South. Orange is the color of anti-Catholic bigotry in the Irish-British context. (UPDATE 3/18/20 I used Dixieland because A) it rhymed, B) I thought it would indicate that I was comparing the North with the South in the sense that they were both bigoted, etc.)
7. The West Bank refers to the 99% nationalist part of Derry, to the west of the River Foyle. It’s where 14 anti-internment/civil rights marchers were killed by the British Army on Bloody Sunday in 1972.
8. Chronologically three of the cities/places I chose don’t make much sense, since they were sites of ongoing struggles in the 1980s OR, the struggle hadn’t begun. Whatever.

Ramallah is in the West Bank in PALESTINE. There’s a lot of solidarity between the Irish and the Palestinians.

Paris. When Bobby Sands died (see this and the middle third of this), the socialist Prime Minister of France offered to attend the funeral, but he consulted Dublin and they said no.

Chiapas. In 1998 or 1999, on May 5th (Cinco de Mayo and the day in 1981 that Bobby Sands died) I went to a fundraiser for the Chiapas Coalition in Denver, CO (the CC were supporters of the Zapatistas, the EZLN). I asked if I could say something about Bobby Sands and they let me speak for a couple minutes. Later, another speaker who had spent time with the EZLN, said that they (the EZLN) were very concerned about the North.

Cape Town. The ANC strongly supported the IRA (see this). I think their military wing was large and I THINK they had trouble finding work for everyone and it MIGHT have made sense, in this scenario where a call is made for foreign fighters, to send some.

9.  Until late 2001 the RUC were the police in N. Ireland.
10. Orthodox republicans, if there are any left, believe(d) that the Republic proclaimed at the beginning of the 1916 Easter Rising still exists and has been usurped by the Northern State and the Southern State. I have never believed that, but it still seemed like a good adjustment to the original lyrics, and in the 1980s, I think that almost all Northern Sinn Fein members probably DID believe it, and probably a large minority of Southern SF members also believed it.
11. Margaret Thatcher was a hardcore Tory and British imperialist who was Prime Minister in the 1980s.
12. Ian Stuart Donaldson was, in the 1980s and early 1990s (until his hilarious death in 1993), the leader of the worldwide Nazi skinhead movement, and as a British Nazi, he was incredibly supportive of the British and Unionist causes in N. Ireland.
13. Ian Paisley was, between the mid-1960s and about 2005, a very visible, extremely Unionist and anti-Catholic politician.
14. In the late 1990s a US Representative, Donald Payne from NJ, sponsored legislation in the House that would ban the sale of plastic bullets to the UK. He had traveled to the North and I feel safe assuming that some US corporation was selling the plastic bullets used in the North (or he was just really cool and pro-active, but I bet they were being sold to the UK). (Payne is Black)
15. I mention they were Catholic because I recently decided it’s frustrating that American Catholics in general showed almost no interest in the conflict, frustrating because although there were other factors (anti-Irish bigotry, economic factors, etc.) to a large extent SECTARIANISM affected the lives of Northern Catholics.
16. I wanted to recognize the contributions made by gay members of the Nationalist community.
17. Here are some ways that Washington wasn’t neutral:

1) It seems that D.C. never privately put firm pressure on the British to dramatically change its policy in N. Ireland and/or create a significant role for the South in the affairs of the North (or even, better, begin a process of withdrawal). If they did this privately, it didn't work, and they should have done it publicly (it's possible that to some degree that happened between Clinton and Blair, and had some small effect on the GFA, but the GFA could have been much better, and then there's the ultimate goal of a British withdrawal).

2) Although at some point in the 1970s the President or Vice President of SF did speak at a committee hearing of the US Congress, from 1983 until 1994 the President of SF, Gerry Adams, was not allowed into the US. (he was first allowed into the U.S. in 1994). During this time SF represented about 35-40% of the Nationalist community, and probably about 60% of the poorest, most oppressed half of that community.

3) During the entire conflict, something like 20 former republican Volunteers went through either extradition or deportation proceedings. I think all the extradited were sent back to the UK, I think most of the deportation cases were deported. I know of at least one deportation, and this was probably the case with all of them, where the issue was that he said on the immigration paperwork that he was never convicted of a crime, and the U.S. government said that he in fact had been. The thing is, republican Volunteers don't consider themselves criminals, and even the British government, to some degree, has recognized this by treating them as prisoners of war during most of the conflict. But the U.S. Government disagrees. There's evidence that some very large majority of the nationalist community more or less supported the hunger-strikers of 1981 (see the middle third of this) whose struggle convinced the British to extend status as prisoners of war (or political status, basically the same thing), which makes me think that some very large majority of the nationalist community was more or less unhappy about the extraditions and deportations (also, the massive anti-internment march that was attacked on Bloody Sunday in 1972 was primarily organized not by republicans but by a senior SDLP politician).

18. I can’t abide praising Reagan for a lot of reasons. He and Thatcher were best friends.

19. Practically the entire last full verse was in the original, and the 95 yo is, I assume, someone David Rovics actually knew (possibly Robert Steck). That’s part of why I changed it to “she” and “her”. Like practically all of my poems, this is not written from my perspective, it’s some faceless American socialist character I invented. I don’t know any Communists- please tell the House Un-american Activities Committee that if they ask about me. :  )
20. The Short Strand is an isolated Catholic enclave in Unionist East Belfast.
21. I almost hate bringing this up, especially because the post I’ll link to needs some work but it’s massive and I don’t know when I’ll make it near perfect. I believe that during The Troubles, and especially after Apartheid was shattered by the ANC and before those assholes in Al-Qaeda attacked on 9/11, the world, to one degree or another kind of or totally dropped the ball when it came to solidarity with the Nationalist community. I focus like a laser on the American Left and to a lesser degree the west European Left. That post is here, and the relevant part starts with the mention of South Africa about 1/3 from the top.
22. I couldn’t make up my mind about how the story ends. But then I decided to make a few more changes and make it a happy ending- not what happened in the Short Strand, but Ireland being united in the end.
23. **36% of this version is me, 64% is the kick-ass original.
24. UPDATE 4/1/20 I maybe should have altered the very last part less than I did. I deleted the phrase "It's a place that we all know so well" because it's not well known among American progressives today, as I mention in note 21 above. I forgot that in this alternate timeline, it IS well known. But I'm going to keep it the way it is, I just didn't want anyone to think that I didn't like David's lyrics.
25. UPDATE 4/1/20 I deleted the word "most" from the 3rd line of the second verse. It implied, for example, that Hindus didn't fight. I was lazy and didn't alter that when I first wrote it, I didn't mean to exclude anyone.
26. As I prove in a fairly scientific way here, only .3% of the IRA's operations resulted in civilian death.

They were old when I was young Now they're all but passed away
Now it's just a second hand story we hear about on the first of May
When from all around the world They sailed off to Ireland
Where they fought against the Brits and to liberate Orange Dixieland
Who will recall the days When they all stood side by side
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

Beside striking workers Or in a St. Patrick’s Day Parade
You could see those who made the journey To join the Connolly/Larkin Brigade
When men and women of many nations Of every creed and hue
Catholics and Protestants, Muslims,  Atheists and Jews
Joined together in the West Bank To avenge the fourteen who died
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

The working class of many countries responded to the desperate invitation
With what weapons they could find They fought to unite the Irish nation
From Ramallah and Paris, Chiapas and Cape Town
Who will recall the Brigadistas Who bravely took the RUC down
There beside the Catholic people Even the sheep and cattle cried
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

The 1916 Republic had the people But the British Army had the tanks
Thatcher and Ian Stuart got only some of Paisley’s premature thanks
'Cause the plastic bullets to take down rioters Came from the USA
And the boys and girls they knocked down Were Catholic and some of them were gay
Uncle Sam wasn’t neutral, and praising Reagan is something I can’t abide
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

Some say people get conservative The older that they age
They say that being radical Is just a youthful stage
But the finest communist I've known Lived to 95
And she spent her whole life fighting For humanity to thrive
To forget these fallen heroes Is something I cannot abide
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died
Now that the last Connolly/Larkin Veteran died

There's a neighborhood in East Belfast called the Short Strand
It was there that we showed our solidarity Where so many comrades made their final stand

"Anti-Imperialist Unity" A New Poem

For the first time in about two years I wrote a new poem. I will usually do more than one at a time, but I am so excited about this that I wanted to post it ASAP. I explain how I write my poems here. (as I mention in that post, when I use the first person, I am almost never using my perspective, but I don't feel like changing all the first person terms, and I guarantee you I haven't attributed an opinion in this one to Costello that is in conflict with what he believed)

You can find all my poems by clicking on the "lyrics" label at the bottom.

“Anti-Imperialist Unity” based on “Unity is Power” by Kill, Baby, Kill, original lyrics are here.

1. The title is a phrase used by Seamus Costello, who was a leader of the Irish Republican Socialist Party and its military wing the Irish National Liberation Army. He believed in this concept, although I’m not sure what groups he had in mind besides his RSM and the Provisionals (what have been called in recent decades Sinn Fein and the IRA). Maybe he hoped he could convince his former comrades in Official SF and the Official IRA (the other side of the 1969/70 split that produced the Provisionals), but probably not. Probably People’s Democracy (a civilian but militant left-wing anti-Partition group born as a part of the civil rights movement that had taken place between 1967 and 1972), who I have reason to believe were friendly to the IRSP. Maybe 1-3? tiny left groups that were anti-Partition and maybe one or two tiny republican groups that I can’t think of. And maybe unaffiliated individuals would be welcome. I haven’t read his speeches and interviews in a long time and am not sure I can find them, but I imagine the unifying principles would be at least a lukewarm belief in socialism and a firmer opposition to Partition. He died in 1977, so this about the period 1975-1977.                 
2. The RUC were until late 2001 the police in N. Ireland.
3. I doubt Army bases were in anything smaller than a medium-sized town (i.e. Omagh, Strabane).
4. Starting around the beginning of the conflict and continuing in recent years some statistics about average pay indicate that the cost of labor is lower in N. Ireland than it is in Britain. On the other hand, the rate of unionization is higher in N. Ireland, but I think this has little effect because

A) sectarianism divides workers from taking effective action together,

B) it’s difficult for passionately anti-sectarian socialists to get into major positions of power in N. Ireland’s labor movement,

C) many of those who might take that kind of role were busy with the National Question and related issues and/or had/have criminal records from republican activity (something similar could be said about some reformed loyalists, for example the late David Ervine),

D) although the Churches aren’t nearly as central to N. Ireland politics as you might think, the Catholic Church there is not that of El Salvador’s late Archbishop Oscar Romero,

E) center-right politics dominate the Unionist community, perhaps because bigotry and colonialism tend to do that (i.e. most leftists advocate against that kind of shit, and are ignored even when they focus on issues that are purely class), and

F) it might be relevant that the police were, until recently, VERY prepared to break some heads and until recently had excellent political cover if they did so (potential strikers may have also been reluctant to confront soldiers with powerful rifles who were trained for aggression and had even better cover if they killed someone),

G) there is no labour party with the kind of power that the British Labour Party has in Britain (the SDLP don't count, see this and SF is hated by Unionists (you could say something similar about the SDLP, either because they're Catholics, or because they're socially conservative and middle-class, so the vast majority of those Protestants who are working-class and/or progressive don't vote for them))

More evidence for what I say in the last line of the 1st verse is found in the following facts taken from the book Northern Ireland: the Orange State by Michael Farrell:

“In 1974 45% of all firms in Northern Ireland employing 500 or more workers were controlled from Britain, as were 28 out of 51 firms employing between 250 and 500 workers” p. 326

5. The pride would be both the working-class kind and the Irish kind.
6. Fenian is a derogatory term for Catholic and republican, but has been adopted by republicans.
7. James Connolly was Ireland’s greatest socialist and greatest republican.
8. Republicans did a lot of feuding. Even if it was slightly unavoidable, it was bad. People who were, to one degree or another, good republicans and/or socialists were lost. It was demoralizing for the communities they were based in. It distracted form fighting the British. It was used by the British in anti-republican propaganda.
9. In 1975 the IRSP became one of the two first political parties in Ireland to call for gay rights (the other one was PD). I wouldn’t be surprised if in the mid-70s about 25% of the Provos supported gay rights (in 1991 a publication by and for IRA POWs published an article by a gay Volunteer calling for the movement to recognize the contributions made by gay and bi-sexual Volunteers).
10. **27% of this poem is me, 73% is the original.


So much wrong in the North today, the Catholics are being oppressed
What's the point of fighting each other, when the North’s in a mess?
RUC Barracks in every district, Army bases in every town
The Brits are occupiers and they’re trying to keep the cost of labor down

This is the voice of Costello, a voice full of pride
Calling out with a message now- we must all be allied
So listen fenians and reds, listen well, unity's a must
If we can't achieve to unite as one our efforts will go bust

Chorus:
Unity is power, unity is grand, Unity’s the weapon to defend our land
Unity's the answer to Connoilly’s call
Unity will set our class and nation free, Unity will bring us final victory
If we stand united, we will never fall

All these senseless feuds only give the Brits a laugh
Comrades we must stand as one, fighting on the people’s behalf
Shoulder to shoulder, brothers and sisters, make sure we'll never fail
So stick together and act as one, united we'll prevail

Chorus

To all of those who share our beliefs: United we will win
Unity brings victory, it's the power from within
So join our ranks on the battlefield, together side by side
To fight our people's enemies and for Irish freedom and gay pride

Babylon 5 Reviews K

Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.

Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.


**Season 4, Episode 18 “Intersections in Real Time”** See this for a plot summary.

At the end of the last episode, Sheridan is captured by Earth forces. This episode is entirely about him being questioned. They aren’t looking for information, but for a false confession that crucially includes him admitting to being led by aliens. Most of what the interrogator does is not torture (very little physical torture and none of the sort of non-violent torture that was also used at Abu Ghraib in Iraq). A good example of what his interrogator does is ask him first if he’s "controlled" by “outsiders” and then, before Sheridan answers, asks if he’s "influenced" by “others.” Sheridan says no, clearly (in my opinion) not noticing the difference between the two questions and/or thinking of the first question. But the interrogator then says that EVERYONE is influenced by others and Sheridan must be lying. Of course if Sherdian had said yes either at first or after being called a liar, the Earth gov’t would have taken that (recorded answer) as an answer to the first question.


**Season 4, Episode 19 “Between the Darkness and the Light”** see this for a plot summary.

There’s about five minutes that continue with an attempt to get Sheridan to say that the rebellion he led was really an alien conspiracy. About half-way through the episode he’s freed by Garibaldi, Franklin, and Lyta.

One other thing worth mentioning is that the Narn, the Centauri, and the League of Non-Aligned Worlds agree to militarily support Sheridan (more, apparently, than they already were). G’Kar says that since the Shadow war they “have begun working together as never before. In the past we had nothing in common but now the humans have become the glue that holds us together.”

On one hand it seems like the beginning of what we see very shortly at the end of the 4th season, which is the creation of something sort of comparable to Star Trek’s "the Federation." On the other hand, I don’t like the Earth-centric nature of these developments.


**Season 4, Episode 21 “Rising Star”** See this for a plot summary.

There are at least two political things in this episode.

First, the acting President of Earth says that Sheridan did the right thing the “wrong way.” That doesn’t make much sense. In his position, I’m not sure what else he could have done. I’m not saying that armed rebellion is the only way to deal with a dictatorship. There is always the option of mass struggle- getting people in the street, or sitting down in protest, etc. But, according to the acting President of Earth, dissidents on that planet felt like they couldn’t do anything. How could Sheridan have contributed to a non-violent resistance on Earth while in command of B5? He could have used non-violent methods ON B5 without breaking from Earth, but it seems to me that breaking away was more effective. It must have been more visible and inspirational to the rest of the Earth Alliance population than marches or non-violent civil disobedience on B5 (without breaking from Earth as they did (and which could have been more easily covered up in the media than what they actually did)).

The first battle with forces loyal to the President was kind of defensive in nature. I think that, considering there were other parts of the Earth Force that broke with the Earth gov’t, Sheridan, would have been doing the wrong thing if he had abandoned them. Then, the most immediate cause of him going on the offensive was the slaughter of civilians by Earth Force ships under orders from the President.

This reminds me of N. Ireland and the Provisional IRA’s campaign. I defend it in many places on this blog, but perhaps the two main things you should read are here and here. It would be kind of reasonable of people who disagree with me about this to point to the years where the PIRA’s campaign overlapped with the last 2-3 years of the Civil Rights Movement (1970-72) and say that the PIRA should have been on cease-fire during that time. First, as far as I can tell there was probably a majority and maybe a LARGE majority of members and supporters of the Provisional Republican Movement (what we call in recent decades, Sinn Fein and the IRA) that DID participate in the CRM. And during those years, even the Official IRA (the other side of the split that produced the Provisionals and the side which was fully in support of the CRM) was waging an armed campaign of some significance.

The Officials went on cease-fire in 1972 (not long after the CRM was kind of displaced by the PIRA’s campaign as the dominant answer to unionism and British imperialism) and have remained there since (well, until some time in the 1980s their cease-fire wasn't totally solid in different ways but it was close). I haven’t heard of the Officials organizing any large-scale protests and/or marches as a replacement for armed struggle, and they had the support of about 4% of the nationalist community in the 1970s and that went down further in the 80s and 90s. They were pretty irrelevant as an example of a better form of resistance.

The SDLP was getting a large chunk of the Nationalist vote. When looking at the 70s (when PSF wasn’t running candidates) and thinking about how much support they had in the Nationalist community, it seems unavoidable and reasonable to assume that they had the same level of support that they had in the 80s and 90s, which would have been about 60% (this is based partly on voting figures and population figures in the 1970s). But after the decline of the CRM, it looked like the SDLP were not organizing marches and rallies, etc. In fact John Hume, who was a very senior member in the 70s and was the SDLP’s leader in the 80s and 90s, was not a major advocate of marches during the time of the Civil Right Movement. He opposed three key marches during that time. And about 15 years ago, I read an article where a senior SDLP member poured cold water on the idea of organizing marches.

There are two more ways in which the SDLP didn’t represent a more populist, people-based and non-violently subversive response to what was being done to the Nationalist population. In general it wouldn’t hurt if you read this post about the SDLP. Items #4, #5, and #8 are especially relevant. #3 might also be relevant. As I wrote elsewhere on this blog:

In his 1998 book "McCann: War and Peace in Northern Ireland," NI socialist and trade-unionist Eamonn McCann writes, "the trade union movement is better placed than any other to purge the politics of this island of sectarianism. No other institution brings Catholic and Protestant workers together on a regular basis in pursuit of a common purpose which is antipathetic to sectarianism." McCann makes it clear that he doesn't think this potential has been tapped more than occasionally, and [Mark] Langhammer agrees with his analysis.

(Mark Langhammer is or was for a while a senior N. Ireland member of the Irish Labour Party)

I don’t know what SDLP members in the trade-union movement did or didn’t do along those lines, but the fact is they didn’t succeed in orientating that movement the way McCann and Langhammer suggested, and that might indicate that either A) they had almost no one in that movement and/or B) they didn’t try. As far as SDLP MEMBERS (not voters) go, they have been consistently described as being middle-class.

I don’t mean to totally acquit the Provisionals when it comes to this. Speaking of republicans in general, Bernadette Devlin-McAliskey called for them to do more work organizing people and less work organizing armies. What I said about the SDLP and the  trade-unions might apply, to a lesser degree, to PSF. As a more working-class party they probably had more members in the trade-unions, (but maybe not since they may have had more trouble getting jobs- because they were more likely to have a criminal record). I also won’t deny that Protestant and unionist TRADE-Unionists were probably less interested in what SF members had to say than what SDLP trade-unionists had to say. And lastly, although I’m certain PSF made more efforts to get people in the streets than the SDLP did, they weren’t ridiculously successful with it (that is, outside the context of the prisoners' struggle around 1980 when they were massively successful).

For more info about mass struggle in the Troubles, see this.


The other issue is something that was said about the creation of the Interstellar Alliance. As far as I can tell it’s similar to the Federation of Star Trek, but less centralized. While announcing the creation of the IA and inviting Earth to join, Delenn talks about free-trade (probably not anything comparable to NAFTA), a code of conduct for interstellar relations, a reserved but possibly very useful armed component, and more. At one point she says: “this new alliance will help less-advanced worlds improve their conditions.” It’s at moments like this when I wish I was about 20 times more familiar with the EU than I am, but it reminds me of the sometimes-met potential of the EU. The EU has, as far as I can tell, done a lot about civil rights and human rights and civil liberties. At the very least they have some potential to redistribute wealth around the EU. The Earth joins the IA, which requires them to recognize an independent Mars.


**Season 4, Episode 22 “The Deconstruction of Falling Stars”** See this for a plot summary.

This episode is more creative than most, and kind of special. We are shown a current affairs TV show discussion about 2-3 weeks after Sheridan defeats the forces loyal to the President. Then a similar show about 100 years after that event, and then a recording made 500 years after Sheridan’s victory and lastly, a hidden recording about 1,000 years after that event.

The first discussion involves an obnoxious supporter of the deceased President whose grip on power was broken by Sheridan. There’s a lot of talk from him about Sheridan being unsuitable as a leader of the Interstellar Alliance (IA). First, Sheridan is criticized for firing on "his own ships." What’s intentionally ignored is that there was a civil war raging, a war that Sheridan hadn’t started, and a war that involved the late President’s ships firing on their former colleagues in the Earth military. Second, he says that Sheridan arranged for independence for Mars “at gunpoint.” This ignores the fact that Earth was keeping Mars under Earth control, “at gunpoint.”

*         *          *          *

In the third part of this episode, we learn that one of two factions on Earth is preparing to launch a propaganda campaign aimed at weakening support for the IA by creating fake recordings of the top four Babylon 5 figures doing horrible things like summary executions, following speeches about how there will be no mercy. I am wondering how much of that is aimed at supporters of that faction, or undecideds, or the other faction. If it’s the latter, I guess it’s because they want to sow doubt and confusion about what the founders of the IA were really like.

Their motivation for this is that they feel the need and/or desire to colonize and conquer new worlds and the IA and it’s military (the Rangers) are obstacles. Which is exactly what they should be. The imperialist faction is also planning on launching a first strike, probably with nuclear weapons and aimed at civilian targets in areas their opponents govern. The virtual reality version of Garibaldi engages in some cleverness and warns the IA-aligned areas who strike at the military targets in areas governed by the imperialists.

Babylon 5 Reviews G

Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.

Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.

**Season 3 Episode 3 “A Day in the Strife”** See this for a plot summary.

This episode contains a fair amount of stuff about the Centauri occupation of Narn. We learn that there is a resistance and that for every Centauri killed 500 Narn are killed. The former dissolved the old Narn government and created a provisional government. The representative of it sent to B5 opposes the resistance, saying it is the wrong time. I am inclined to think, when would be the right time? This Narn collaborator vaguely talks about waiting until they’re a bit stronger and the Centauri have been lulled into a sense of false security. Between the fact that he is officially a collaborator and at one point he blames the resistance, not the Centauri, for the nightmare the Narn are experiencing, I’m inclined to dismiss his opposition to the resistance.

Looking at N. Ireland, I believe that certainly there were some times when it was a bad idea to use violence. First I have supported the cease-fire since day one. And I would agree that in the late '60s it would have been inappropriate for the IRA to have been conducting operations in N. Ireland. But after Aug. 1969 (when there were massive anti-catholic pogroms) and especially about 9 months later when, independent of the IRA, the relationship between the British Army and the nationalist community went bad, it was legitimate for the IRA to attack the security forces. After that, they usually had the backing of about 40% of the population and in my opinion the right analysis of the situation- it was very important to unite Ireland, considering what had been done to the nationalist population around 1970. As I explain here only about .3% of the IRA’s operations were aimed at killing civilians.

There is a scene in the episode which I think is worth quoting in full. The Narn representative of the new government meets wit the Centauri ambassador (Mollari) and his aide, Vir.

Mollari: You know, I was thinking of visiting your world sometime soon. I couldn’t really get a good look at it the last time I was in the area. Do you think it would be safe for someone such as myself to visit your world now?

Na’far: Yes, quite safe.

Mollari: The streets are kept clear of troublemakers, rock throwers, protestors?

Nar’far: The surviving streets are quite empty, ambassador.

Molarri: The work farms, the relocation camps, the construction gangs are all operating at capacity?

Na’far: (nodds)

Mollari: And the executions, Na’far? The executions continue?

Na’far: The executions continue.

Mollari: Progress! It’s a beautiful thing to behold, no, Vir? [to Na’far] you may contact G’Kar, now. go, go (Na’far leaves)

Vir: Was that necessary?

Mollari: They got out of their place once. We must make sure it does not happen again.

Vir: Londo, we’ve beaten them. Their cities are in ashes, their mlitary is wiped out. They’ve lost hundreds and thousands of lives. They have nothing left!

Mollari: No, there you are wrong. They still have their pride. He tries to hide it, this one, but I can see it in his eyes. As long as it remains, they will always be a threat.

Vir: So, is that what it’s about? Pride? It’s not enough that we’ve beaten them, we have to break them?

Mollari: Yes. I’m sorry, I thought you understood that. I don’t want our people to go through this in another 100 years.


I think this illustrates the racial nature of imperialism very well.


**Season 3 Episode 5 “Voices of Authority”** See this for a plot summary.

The main political dimension to this episode is the appointment of a Political Officer to keep an eye on Sheridan. She talks a lot about his need to be more sensitive to what the Earth Government wants. She says a few other things that are worth noting:

1. She doubts that the Centauri are bent on war because Earth has a treaty with them- but in the previous year or so, the Centauri were invading planet after planet and showed no signs of stopping.

2. She says the homeless people on Earth don’t want jobs and have chosen to be homeless. She says “they’re either lazy, or they’re criminal or they’re mentally unstable.” She says that the Earth Government has promised everyone a job. But that must be something they didn’t follow up on (Captain Sheridan says the homeless can’t get jobs). At one point she admits that they re-wrote the dictionary in order to “solve” problems.

3. She talks about the expansion of McCarthy-esque policies and admits that civil rights and civil liberties will be abridged further than they already have been, and explicitly talks about keeping Earth “ideologically pure.”

**Season 3 Episode 6 “Dust to Dust”** For a plot summary see this.

There is one small bit of politics at the beginning. It's another example of the Night Watch’s McCarthyism. Captain Sheridan stands against it forcefully.

**Season 3 Episode 10 “Severed Dreams”** See this for a plot summary.

In recent episodes there was nothing that really stood out as especially political. The anti-democratic tendencies of the Earth Government  have been mentioned in episodes a little earlier so I didn’t say anything till now about the political crisis on Earth when it was exposed that the President had come into power as the result of a coup. Martial law was declared, the Senate was dissolved, and in this episode, there is a full-blown civil war.

In this episode, Mars rebels against the government, and two other colonies plus Babylon 5 declare independence.

Babylon 5 Reviews F

Years ago I did what you might call “reviews” of Star Trek episodes. I mostly just briefly noted what progressive politics were involved and sometimes used that as an excuse to talk about similar situations in reality.

Last year I finally watched all five seasons of Babylon 5, another sci-fi show, one I had thought of watching once in a while stretching back a couple decades. It isn’t as political or as progressive as ST but there’s some good stuff there- in fact, on one issue, a progressive take on the working-class and/or labor movement, B5 is better than ST. Because there is so little progressive material, I’m going to do one post for every four episodes reviewed, and only mention the episodes that have some progressive political stuff. I might ignore some of the more minor and/or less unique stuff about conflict resolution because from what I remember, it’s very common in this series. Also, although less so than is the case with Star Trek, multiculturalism is a big part of Babylon Five and I will also only be commenting on that when it goes further than usual. There are issues raised about telepaths- I’m going to completely ignore stuff about telepaths when reviewing these episodes. I also will probably say nothing about the conflict with the evil race the Shadows- sure, I could say Trump is as evil as they are or compare them to Nazi Germany, but that’s kind of silly (I’m sure there is nothing political about the Shadows, they’re just evil, like the Borg or the Empire). And I might skip most of the stuff about the conflict between B5 and the Earth government- I don’t remember it involving stuff like a strong capitalist agenda or racism or something.


**Season 2, Episode 12 “Acts of Sacrifice”** See this for a plot summary.

There are about seven political issues here:

1) The Narn ambassador G’Kar tries to get support from Earth Alliance and the Minbari in their war with the Centauri. The ambassador from the Minbari is reluctant to see Minbar side with the Narn, partly because they were in a war just about 10 years earlier and she doesn’t want another war. And partly because they have reason to believe that if the war started going the Narns’ way, they might try to give the Centauri a dose of their own genocidal medicine. The Narn, who experienced a near-genocidal Centauri occupation when G’Kar was younger, seem to have adopted the slogan “Never Again” but sometimes sound like they might take it to the extreme of beating the Centauri race to death.

2) Tensions between the Narn and Centuri civilians on B5 are growing. In one incident a group of the latter are in a bar talking about how the Centauri Republic is now “great again” as a result of their war with the Narn. They go on to insult the Narn people. A group of Narn hear this and a fight almost starts.

3) A representative from an unfamiliar alien race comes to B5 to meet representatives of the Earth Alliance (Sheridan wants them either as allies, or as members of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds). It quickly becomes apparent that they believe they are superior and most other races are inferior.

At one point they talk about letting evolution take it’s course and letting races die off or profit without any interference such as medical help but they DO believe in medical help for their own people.

At another point they are shown the poor part of B5, where the population is mostly human. They admire what they see as a racial policy by humans of segregating the relatively inferior parts of humanity. Obviously B5 isn’t doing that but it’s interesting to see what seems like the writers of the show taking a swipe at the Earth Alliance and B5’s leadership for failing to create a utopia like the Federation in Star Trek (to a large degree the senior staff of B5 are more or less progressive but it seems like they’re dependent on Earth Alliance for funding and the poverty on Earth follows people to B5).


**Season 2 Episode 16 “In the Shadow of Z’Ha’Dum”** See this for a plot summary.

There are 1-2 political aspects to this episode. First, Captain Sheridan detains a man for questioning for more than 10 hours without charging him. The chief of security, after 10 hours, tries to convince him to let the guy go, and resigns when he won’t. As I’ve said before the chief of security seems like the least progressive of B5’s command staff and seems more concerned about getting in trouble than about the civil liberties issue involved. I’m tempted to say that this seriously erodes my opinion of Captain Sheridan as a progressive, but on the other hand, he was detaining the guy for non-political reasons. It wasn’t a case of political dissent or alleged criminal activity. His wife was lost on a space exploration mission and he had good reason to think that the detainee knew what really happened to her. It was still wrong to detain the guy but I find it less offensive than I would if it were about dissent or crime. He ends up admitting to the security chief that he (Sheridan) was wrong and says it won’t happen again.

The other political thing is that the government on Earth has created a “Ministry of Peace.” Initially it sounds like something almost progressive. But it turns out that it sees (political) division and dissent in the human population as a threat to peace. They depoliticize dissent and see it as a criminal or psychological problem and recruit people to report such behavior to them, so that dissidents can be “helped.” Even worse, this is an illegal and more or less right-wing government (it’s not super-clear, but if they continue some of the policies of the last President and you combine that with new actions and attitudes of the new regime, they’re fairly right-wing (especially if the more offensive senators are aligned with the new President and I don’t think there’s anything saying otherwise)). Below is the full transcript of the Ministry of Peace representative trying to recruit people:

MoP: In the last 10 years Earth has rebuilt it’s defenses magnificently. We can protect our people from physical harm. But is that enough? We cannot hope to make peace with other civilizations until we have found peace with ourselves. And that, quite simply, is what the Ministry of Peace is all about. Now as Babylon 5 has an early warning system to detect possible attacks, we at the Ministry of Peace have created a system of our own. We call it the Night Watch, named after those brave citizens who stood vigil in the darkness against possible enemies. It’s a completely volunteer organization, officially endorsed by Earth Dome [the government]. Members receive 50 credits per week above and beyond their regular salaries for services rendered.

POSSIBLE RECRUIT: What kind of services?

MoP: Mainly just to be present wearing the colors of the Night Watch. Raise public awareness, make them start thinking about peace, about the way they treat one another.

POSSIBLE RECRUIT 2: I can’t believe Earth would pay us 50 credits a week just to walk around the station.

MoP: Correct. As the name implies you must also be watchful. Peace can be made or broken with a gun, a word, an idea, even a thought. Now those who work against peace sow the seeds of discontent. They plant stories. They undermine the public good. It’s not because they are necessarily evil, it’s because they don’t know any better. They’re unhappy. And they lash out in the only way they can. So if we are made aware of these problems as they occur then we can find these people. We can talk to these people. We can embrace them in the arms of society while at the same time protecting society from misinformation and harmful ideas. We’re less interested in actions than we are in attitudes. We must help protect society against it’s own worst instincts. By taking these bold steps we will help to ensure a better future for everyone. I’m proud to be a part of it and I hope you’ll all join me in becoming part of the Night Watch.


**Season 2 Episode 18 “Confessions and Lamentations”** See this for a plot summary.

Although I might not change this, when I wrote (in the intros to these reviews) that Babylon 5 wasn’t as progressive as Star Trek, I was thinking partly of the issue of gay rights. Neither ST nor B5 have any LGBT characters (well, ST kind of does, in the MIRROR UNIVERSE but that’s only about .3% of all the Star Trek episodes and B5 MIGHT have one character who is both male and female but it’s unclear and only comes up very briefly in one episode (he only outs himself to one person, who seems uncomfortable with it)). But ST drops some hints in at least 4 episodes that homophobia is wrong. I know that in the 1980s homophobia was a big part of our nation’s response to HIV/AIDS and I think that it’s probably been a  slowly declining part of it since then. With that in mind, B5 DID do (in 1995) an episode basically about HIV/AIDS.

It’s revealed that an alien race, the Markab, are experiencing a deadly plague. At one point Dr. Franklin compares the response of the Markab to the plague with the heterosexual population's response to HIV/AIDS.

After he learns about the plague, he has a conversation with a Markab doctor who had been trying to cover it up. Three of the Markab doctor’s comments are worth quoting directly.

“It is not something we talk about…. The disease only appeared once before. Centuries ago. On a small island on our world, noted for certain excesses. When it was struck down, the rest of my people believed it was a punishment by the gods for their lack of morality.”

“The first new case of Drafa [the plague] was detected nearly a year ago. The family was so scandalized by it that they lied about what killed him.”

“Some of us have been working to find a cure without enough money or resources. They [the government] don’t want to talk about it, as if the very subject makes them dirty.”


In the end, it appears that at least 99% of the Markab population is dead. And they might have found a cure if not for their hostility towards those they considered immoral.

**Season 2 Episode 22 “The Fall of Night”** See this for a plot summary.

We learn towards the beginning that the Centuari have been attacking some of the space and planets of it’s neighbors. Their ambassador claims it is to create a buffer zone around the space of the Centauris and claims it will reduce tension and war, which makes no sense. Even if the races attacked DON’T go to war with the Centauri immediately it’s unlikely they will resume normal relations with their invader before many years have passed and they will make arrangements to repel any more attacks, which will mean a lot of military forces close to the areas seized for the buffer zone.

Most of this episode is about the growing schism between B5 and the Earth Alliance. Two representatives of the Ministry of Peace (one from the Night Watch (I say a lot about it in the second review in this post)) come aboard B5 to talk with various ambassadors. The one who leads the Night Watch has an interesting conversation with a recurring minor character in the security force who is a (dissenting) member of NW. The MoP leader uses the word sedition to refer to the threat being dealt with by the NW, and mentioned the following examples: A) a store owner who felt that the regulations for imports were “nuts;” B) dock-workers consistently late for work (allegedly affecting efficiency); C) poor residents of B5 talking to reporters about poverty there and back on Earth (finally evidence that the new regime brought in by a hidden coup is capitalist); D) and lastly two more shop owners openly criticizing presidential decisions.

This next subject over-laps with the last one, but there is a lot about the Centauri-Narn conflict. I sometimes encounter minor topics that I decide to skip and in recent episodes there have been a few things about that conflict that I want to mention here. First, when the Centauri (strategically helped by the evil Shadows) find the Narn Homeworld unguarded, they bombard it from orbit with things called “mass drivers” which are banned by practically everyone except the Centauri. Here and there the B5 command staff have been fairly sympathetic to the Narn side of things, and with good reason. The last time the Centauri occupied Narn planets and space it was genocidal and after the first time a Narn outpost is occupied by the Centauri in this series (season 2, episode 9), initially the latter wanted to keep the civilian population for forced labor (they only abandon that plan when faced with a threat by Earth to send observers).

In this episode, a Narn heavy cruiser that somehow survived the defeat of Narn by the Centauri comes to B5 seeking sanctuary. After that, the leader of the MoP tells Sheridan that Earth has successfully negotiated  a non-aggression treaty with the Centauri. A member of the NW who is stationed in Command and Control reports the hidden presence of the ship. A Centauri warship shows up and ends up being destroyed by B5 while the Narn escape.

At the end of the episode, two things happen: 1) the Centauri invade more space of the League of Non-Aligned Worlds races, and 2) a shop-keeper is taken away by NW members.

Strategically Comprehensive

In a recent poem I created this rhyming couplet about Sinn Fein and the IRA (if you're not familiar with my poems, I should explain that I almost always write with someone else's voice, not my own)- “We started with defending our areas, now we’re on the offensive/The republican struggle is strategically comprehensive.” (The first line isn’t relevant to this but I think it’s a good rhyme) (it's a reference to the diversity of their tactics and strategy, for more on that keep reading). Not long after that I discussed with a friend in Dublin (who is also a left-wing supporter of Sinn Fein) the calls by some for SF MPs in the British Parliament (now, *7* of them!) to take their seats (the Democratic Unionist Party took 10 and there is one independent unionist). The argument that I read here and there in favor of SF doing it is that, in the context of a conflict over Brexit between most N. Ireland voters and most British voters (including what must be a majority of the Tory party), N. Ireland needs representation from more than one anti-Brexit politician (the DUP are pro-Brexit and the independent Unionist is anti-Brexit). More generally and especially after the DUP used it’s MPs to prop up the Conservative government, the argument is also that N. Ireland needs anti-Tory representation to try and help stop more austerity and other Tory initiatives.

My friend in Dublin felt that abstention should be seen as a tactic and that SF could embarrass the DUP in the state-wide Parliament and reduce the strength of the Tory/DUP arrangement.

Initially I wrote the following:

“I’ve been thinking of SF and abstentionism. My opinion of Devlin-McAliskey is not hurt by the fact that she took her seat, but I’m inclined to go with what SF says about them taking their seats. I mean, clearly their voters seem just fine with that policy. I also wonder, what is behind that policy? Would they see it as recognizing British rule over the Six-Counties? is it that they have [outside the European Parliament] absolutely zero desire to vote on laws that effect the British people the way British politicians [in the Westminster Parliament] pass laws that govern Irish people [in the North]? Also, isn’t there a good chance it would result in another split in SF- not necessarily a tiny one?

I’m open-minded about what you’re saying, but so far I’m more inclined to just back whatever decision they make about it.”

(although I usually read a LOT about N. Ireland current events in the Irish News and the BBC News, I don’t have the money or time to also read more than a few things a month from republican sources of news and opinion and thus am not REAL familiar with the current thinking in SF)

(Bernadette Devlin-McAliskey is described here)

I’ll return to talk of abstention TODAY shortly.

After the 1981 Hunger-Strike which saw prisoner Bobby Sands elected to Westminster, SF started contesting elections in N. Ireland- I believe for the first time since the ’69/’70 split that saw the Provisionals created. This was a major step forward strategically for the Republican Movement (what back then would have been called the Provisional Republican Movement and what are called in more recent decades Sinn Fein and the IRA). I believe that during most of the years 1982-1997 the PRM was doing almost everything they could do to A) put pressure on the British and the Unionists, B) strengthen their movement, and C) help people. (although I wasn’t doing N. Ireland activism at the time, I would have supported the 1994-96 cease-fire by the IRA (the now permanent cease-fire started in 1997))

I’ll be briefly describing (and here and there evaluating) each part of this effort.

Armed Struggle

First, I did some research and some estimating and some math and concluded that only in .3% of their operations did the (P)IRA attempt to kill civilians. A post about that is here. Also, even though SF’s vote was only (on average) 40% of the Nationalist vote this is not the end of the story. There is plenty of evidence that almost the entire nationalist community supported the 1981 Hunger-Strikers (see the middle third of this). There is also evidence that almost no one in the Nationalist community went to the police about crime and instead almost everyone went to the IRA (this is supported by a statement by Eamonn McCann on pages 22-23 of the 1993 edition of his book “War and an Irish Town” and by an article around 2003 in the Irish Times). Most Nationalists who didn’t support the IRA’s campaign nonetheless agreed more or less with the IRA’s goals and wanted Volunteers (IRA members) around- for defense during times of sectarian tension and for when crime HAD to be dealt with violently.

Armed struggle was many things. It was a statement to the world that (independent of  how that statement was made) Republicans and Nationalists in general had serious problems with being ruled by Britain and with the inequality they experienced at the hands of the British and most of their Protestant neighbors. It was a refutation of Thatcher’s “Normalization” policy. The deaths of British soldiers, RUC officers and UDR (a locally recruited British Army unit) members made the news and underlined the occupation as such (and kind of suggested the possibility that if it weren’t for the British Army the IRA could defeat the local security forces and loyalist paramilitaries to such a degree that it would change the attitude of the Unionist population towards (and in) negotiations with their Nationalist neighbors and the Southern state). Those deaths were also aimed at sapping the will of the British to remain in N. Ireland. The bombing campaign in England had similar goals- sapping the will of the British, making the news and occasionally (in ways that RARELY resulted in civilian death) giving the British people some small sense of the terror their Army inflicted on the Nationalist population. Bombing of economic targets specifically in both England and the North was aimed at pressuring the business community into pressuring the British and the Unionists to change their attitude to negotiation with SF (bearing in mind what I write in the next paragraph (with parentheses), some IRA bombs in the North and in England were aimed largely at just disrupting life for people, to hopefully put more pressure on British and Unionist politicians). Armed struggle might have shown the security forces that they couldn’t  brutalize the Nationalist community with impunity.  Attacks on loyalist paramilitaries were relatively infrequent and probably rightly so- I think an argument has been made that they helped the British with their propaganda about being peace-keepers between two mutually hate-filled tribes.

(about 99% of the time that the IRA bombed civilian property the plan was to place the bomb, leave, phone in a warning, the place would be evacuated, and the bomb would go off. About 99% of the time that that was the plan that is what happened)

When I offered .3% as a relatively solid estimate for IRA operations where civilian life was targeted, I was not counting their efforts to help keep loyalist mobs outside Catholic areas and (towards the very beginning of the conflict) their efforts to help keep the security forces outside of some Catholic areas. The former saw them viewed as defenders of the Nationalist community. The latter made the “no-go” areas (especially Free Derry) possible for about two years. Including that stuff would lower it from .3% to something like .2%

As part of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission process after the first democratic election in South Africa, the ANC partly justified it’s use of force by saying that by attacking the infrastructure and security forces of the Apartheid state they were encouraging others to resist in other ways- that is, they showed that it was possible to strike at the state oppressing them.

Mass Struggle

Mass Struggle might be defined as the mobilization of large numbers of people for non-violent political conflict where their numbers (not arms or money or political power) are their weapons and public spaces are their battlefields- what we saw with the civil rights movements in both the US and N. Ireland. Marches and rallies around the prisoners issue (roughly 1978-1981) were organized (frequently by members or supporters of the Provisional Republican Movement). In terns of getting people in the street it was a massively successful effort, but when the prisoners struggle was over mass struggle appears to have decreased. The nationalist community broke back down into it’s constituent parts and marched separately or not at all. But SF still did organize marches and rallies and such and some WERE very large. Such actions demonstrate how DEEP a movement’s support is, and can result in helpful confrontations with the security forces, in a way more widely accepted than armed struggle.

Young People Rioting

I don’t know how many of those young people were members or supporters of the PRM but I think this is very relevant to putting pressure on the British. This was closer to being mass struggle than armed struggle was and could have been the result of mass struggle. But it also contained some plusses that were found more with armed struggle. It was probably more likely to get in the news than mass struggle, it could have resulted in serious injuries for the security forces (and often did) and even in the absence of an injury it could have sapped the will of the non-local part of the British Army, who were reminded more deeply than usual that they were unwanted in certain areas. But as it was less lethal than armed struggle and less likely (probably a LOT less likely) to result in civilian deaths caused by nationalists and republicans, it was more acceptable than armed struggle to many people.

Elections

Although I feel safe assuming that the PIRA campaign had the support of about 40% of the nationalist community in the 1970s, it is helpful to be able to point to votes for SF as proof that almost half that community DID support the PIRA’s armed campaign in the years 1982-1997. I believe in both “parliamentary” and “non-parliamentary” methods for creating political change but I, and a LOT of people attach a lot of value to how much popular support underground armies have. Election campaigns also give another chance to interact with voters and with the media and explain a party’s platform. Elected politicians, even those who don’t take their seats, might get more respect and/or a larger audience of (for example) potential converts and and might get more assistance of one sort or another from other politicians or activists, etc. (although less relevant, elections were also contested in the South)

Local Government Battles

SF not only contested local government elections, when elected they took their seats. This resulted in two different kinds of important battles engaged in by SF councilors and activists. First, to gain equality within the council- MANY SF councilors were blocked from access to the chamber, and/or to funding they and their areas were entitled to. Second, battles over issues relevant to local government. For example, around 1990 (according to the 1993 edition of McCann’s “War and an Irish Town” (p. 43)) a SF councilor in Derry led a successful campaign against the building of a toxic waste incinerator outside the city. Lastly, in general I think that sitting on local government councils proved that they were willing to try non-violent democratic engagement with their Unionist political opponents.

Propaganda

Propaganda is often defined neutrally and just means putting out a party’s message. SF did one newspaper during this time. One thing that might be sort of unusual in such situations was the HUGE number of murals in areas that were at least heavily if not mostly republican. Murals about the IRA, murals about international struggle, murals comparing the experience of nationalists to the experiences of people of color elsewhere, murals about community issues like poverty or eating disorders, murals about other topics. (I am almost certain that at least 90% of those murals were commissioned by SF, SF members or SF supporters)


International Solidarity

SF has done a fairly good job of generating international solidarity with them and with the nationalist community in some countries outside Ireland and Great Britain. But as I have explained elsewhere on this blog, in my opinion they are handicapping this work by making their approach in America much more moderate than progressive. (although significantly different, semi-successful efforts were made to mobilize supporters in Britain)

There is one tool that was used against Apartheid and that is being used against Israel that they have not pushed and that is boycott of, divestment from, and sanctions against the UK (not UN sanctions of course because of the veto the UK has in the Security Council). SF might have been silent about BDS because they knew that they didn’t have enough support globally to make it work. I go into that in a post here, starting with the paragraph that begins with “Was S. Africa much worse?”


One reason I have done this post is to say that members and supporters of the Republican Movement (and others in the Nationalist community in the North, but I have focused on SF because I support them) have done almost everything they could do to get the British out. Which makes it even more infuriating when I think of how little was done by the Left in western Europe and by the Left in America.


Abstention Today

Going back to abstention in Westminster today, exchanging some emails about it with my Dublin friend got me thinking more about SF taking their seats. I wonder if Westminster could be/should be seen by SF as just another battlefield on which to push the peace process, equality and even Irish Unity. In general it could be a forum to raise those issues. Also, it could help build a broad-based movement of British people supporting the Nationalist community if SF were to consistently vote progressively on things affecting British people like austerity, the environment, etc. (there’s a small mystery for me- the Troops Out Movement, which had good relations with SF, seems to have evaporated??????)

I should say that I believe that what we are talking about here are tactics and strategy but not principles (I have supported the 1997 IRA cease-fire since day one). I believe that the PRM usually did a great job of using them during the conflict and has usually been doing a great job using most of them since the conflict died down and basically ended (I would say around 2005) (with the exception of armed struggle and rioting the others are still being used by members and supporters of SF).

IF SF decide to take their seats, I would not criticize them about that (possibly about some of their votes, but with the exception of abortion I doubt even that would happen).