Myself and my sister, Brenda went on the Rebel Women’s Tour in the General Post Office on Saturday, 1st February 2025. Our Guide was Kim.
Two women’s groups were highlighted: Inghinidhe na hÉireann which was founded by Maud Gonne in 1900 and inspired Cumann na mBan. Inghinide na hÉireann is Irish for “Daughters of Ireland”. It was founded solely for women and adopted Saint Brigid as their patron saint.
Cumann na mBan:
In 1914, Inghinide (modern spelling ‘Iníní’) na hÉireann was merged with Cumann na mBan (abbreviated C na mBan, translated in English as the “Women’s League”). It was formed in Wynn’s Hotel on Lower Abbey Street on the 2nd of April 1914.
Brenda’s husband’s grandmother, Christina Caffrey, was a member. Our Grand Aunt, Theresa Rudkins nee Byrne was also a member as was also an old neighbour of our sister Eileen, Mary Breslin. Cumann na mBan was then led by Kathleen Lane O’Kelley.
One key member whom we are all familiar with is Countess Constance Markiewicz who took an active role in the 1916 Easter Rising which I will come to later.
Cumann na mBan uniform on display in the GPO Museum (Photo: O. Dunne)
1913 Lockout:
During the 1913 Lockout by an employers’ consortium, women including Dr Kathleen Lynn, Helena Moloney, Delia Larkin (sister of Jim Larkin) and Rosie Hackett opened soup kitchens at Liberty Hall to assist struggling workers and families.
The 1916 Easter Rising:
It is estimated that approximately 200 women took part in the Rising and 77 were imprisoned. The only woman sentenced to death was Countess Markiewicz who was second-in-command to Commandant Michael Mallin in St. Stephen’s Green.
Constance Markievicz (colourised) in ICA uniform (Source photo: Internet)
However due to her being female, it was then changed to life imprisonment. She subsequently served 13 months in prison in both Ireland and England. She was outraged that she would not be executed.
Winifred Carney:
Winifred Carney was named as the first woman to enter the GPO on Easter Monday 1916. It is thought that she entered the building wielding a typewriter and revolver.
Winifred Carney (Source photo: Internet)
Elizabeth O’Farrell:
Elizabeth O’Farrell was one of the last three women to remain with the GPO garrison along with Julia Grennan and Winifred Carney and all three spent their last days of freedom in Moore Street. Ms O’Farrell accompanied Patrick Pearse on his journey of surrender to the British forces.
Elizabeth O’Farrell(colourised) after release from jail (Source photo: Internet)
There is a photograph of this and all that can be seen of her are her feet and the end of her dress, as she stood at the far end of Pearse from the photographer.
Julia Grennan (Source photo: Internet)
WOMEN DURING THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE:
Women also played a significant part during the War of Independence. Over 300 women are believed to have assisted by smuggling weapons and ammunition into Ireland and relaying messages from area to area.
WOMEN DURING THE IRISH CIVIL WAR:
The Irish Civil War lasted for almost one year from June 1922 to May 1923 and again women participated in the struggle, believed to have been mainly on the Anti-Treaty side. Female members of the Irish Citizen Army were armed.
Grace Gifford (colourised) with paintbrush and easel (Source photo: Internet)
One such example is Grace Gifford Plunkett who married her beloved fiance, Joseph Mary Plunkett in May 1916 just hours before his execution. She herself was incarcerated in February 1923 in Kilmainham Gaol for her part in the Civil War.
While there she painted a copy of Mary and Child on the wall of the cell.
FEW CAN SEE – Censoring the Conflict was screened last week (Wednesday 4th night) in the Irish Film Institute to a moderately-sized audience, followed by questions of film-maker Frank Sweeney and Betty Purcell by Ruairí McCann from Belfast.
Sweeney took a look at state censorship during the three decades’ war in Ireland which was effected through the introduction of Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, the sacking of the entire RTÉ Board of Directors and the jailing of a journalist.
Henceforth, self-censorship was the rule.
Specifically, the State ban applied during this period in refusals to interview any member of the IRA (Provisional or Official) and was later extended to Provisional Sinn Féin. It was enforced within RTÉ by management including members of the Workers’ Party1 who also led one of the unions.
Docudrama Few Can See focused on the application of the ban to spokespersons of people in the occupied Six Counties and of a number of campaigning groups: Gays Against the H-Blocks; Concerned Parents Against Drugs; the Gateaux bakery strike in Finglas (factory closed 1990).
Gay rights activists in Cork also campaigned against the H-Blocs and were subjected to censorship under Section 31. (Photo sourced: ICCL website)
Frank Sweeney said he had been intrigued by Betty Purcell’s memoir of her time producing programs for RTÉ and her battles with censorship there2. Conducting interviews with people about their experiences of being censored, he then worked the material into a script.
The format was of a 1980s studio with a program presenter in the style of the times and smoking, intercut with grunge-style footage, electronic interference noise and visuals, then narrowing to interviews with actors playing the parts of victims of the ban at the time.
If the intention was to show how ridiculous it could be to apply a political ban aimed at alleged terrorists instead to community struggles against oppression and the heroin epidemic, the struggle of gays around legality and health and a bakery strike, it succeeded.
The ‘RTE presenter’ in the docudrama screening (Photo: R.Breeze)
However, the issues of whose interests the State was representing in that period of heavy censorship and why it felt threatened were not teased out. Nor why it was able do what it did.
Had those issues been addressed we might have observed a vulnerable neo-colonial ruling class during a high point of struggle against the very colonial and neo-colonial nature of the state and the colony of its imperial neighbour, which also imposed censorship on broadcasting at home.
An aspect of such censorship which might not occur to one but which was discussed in the documentary is the effect of censorship not only on struggles of the time but also on the lack of available footage for archives in the future, leaving history the poorer in material.
Few Can See film has been screening around the world this year and has won some awards including the Tiger Short Award at International Film Festival Rotterdam and is due in Barcelona next year, hopefully to be screened in Ireland again, followed by a fuller discussion.
Film maker Frank Sweeney (centre) speaking during post-screening discussion at the IFI with Ruairí McCann (left) and Purcell (almost out of shot, right). (Photo: R.Breeze)
In addition to exposing the State-led censorship of the past, Sinn Féin might benefit from the film as those who were being gagged were either members or were thought to be supporters of the party. However, SF has its own history of censoring critics both within the party and outside.
And as one member of the audience was heard to remark: “It’ll be the dissidents, not SF that will be getting censored now.” True, though no longer enforced by the State, rather voluntarily by program makers, editors and by the reporters themselves, as with the genocide in Palestine.
Indeed both Sweeney, Purcell and a member of the audience alluded to ongoing censorship around that subject. But it is not only suppression of the truth which is the problem but also the obligatory insertion of the false narrative that everything began on 7th October with the Palestinian raid.
BACKGROUND: THE BROADCASTING BAN MECHANISM
Section 31 of the Broadcasting Authority Act 1960 empowered the Minister for Posts and Telegraphs to issue a ministerial order to the government-appointed RTÉ Authority not to broadcast any material specified in the written order.
The first order under the section was issued in 1971 by Fianna Fáil Minister for posts and Telegraphs Gerry Collins.It instructed RTÉ not to broadcast
any matter that could be calculated to promote the aims or activities of any organisation which engages in, promotes, encourages or advocates the attaining of any particular objectives by violent means.
Collins refused clarification when RTÉ asked for advice on what this legal instruction meant in practice and RTÉ interpreted the Order politically to mean that spokespersons for the Provisional and Official IRA could no longer appear on air.
The following year, the government sacked the RTÉ Authority for not sufficiently disciplining broadcasters the government accused of breaching the Order.
RTÉ’s reporter Kevin O’Kelly had referred to an interview that he conducted with the then Provisional IRA Chief of Staff, Seán Mac Stíofáin, on the Radio Éireann This Week programme. The recorded interview was not itself broadcast, nor was Mac Stiofáin’s voice heard.
Premiere balladeer Christy Moore (right) marching with Provisional Sinn Féins Joe Cahill (Photo sourced: Internet)
Mac Stiofáin was arrested after the O’Kelly interview and charged with membership of the IRA, an organisation listed as illegal by the State.
Soon afterwards O’Kelly was jailed for ‘contempt’ at the non-jury Special Criminal Court because he refused to identify a voice on a tape seized by the Gardaí as that of Mac Stiofáin. However Mac Stiofáin was convicted anyway in the “sentencing tribunal” of the SCC.
O’Kelly appealed to the Supreme Court and a fine was substituted as a means of purging O’Kelly’s alleged contempt. O’Kelly declined to pay the fine but it was said to have been paid anonymously and O’Kelly was released.
In 1976, when Conor Cruise O’Brien (Labour) Minister for Posts and Telegraphs amended Section 31 of the Broadcasting Act, he also issued a new Section 31 Order. This censored spokespersons for specific organisations, including the legal Sinn Féin political party, rather than specified content.
That prevented RTÉ from interviewing Sinn Féin spokespersons under any circumstances, even if the subject was unrelated to the IRA campaign in Northern Ireland conflict.
Visually impacting and clever punning in placard parade protest against Section 31. (Photo sourced: Internet)
Bizarrely even a call-in show on radio about gardening was interrupted once because a caller was a member of Sinn Féin.
The changes undermined the relatively liberal interpretations by RTÉ of its censorship responsibilities under the original 1971 Order and encouraged a process of self-censorship and illiberal interpretation.
However in 1976 O’Brien attempted to extend the censorship to newspaper coverage of the conflict, targeting in particular The Irish Press, revealing his thinking in an interview with Washington Post reporter Bernard Nossiter, naming as a possible target Press Editor, Tim Pat Coogan.
Nossiter immediately alerted Coogan, who then published the Nossiter-O’Brien interview in the Irish Press (as did The Irish Times).
Due to public opposition the proposed provisions were amended to remove the perceived threat to newspapers.
But Fine Gael and Labour were not to be left out as the 1973-77 Fine Gael/ Labour Coalition Government also tried to prosecute the Irish Press for its coverage of the maltreatment (not to say torture) of republican prisoners by the Garda ‘Heavy Gang’, with the paper winning the case.
1The Workers’ Party grew out of Official Sinn Féin which was declining after the split which led to the creation of Provisional Sinn Féin in 1970 and later another split, resulting in the 1974 creation of the Irish Republican Socialist Party. The WP was extremely hostile to the IRSP and PSF, in particular the latter.
2Inside RTÉ – a memoir, Betty Purcell, New Island Books (2014).
NB: Rebel Breeze shares this near the anniversary of the fascist military coup in Chile, the same date as the Twin Towers massacre years later.. The article is a year old but relevant as long as British imperialism exists.
As the Pinochet regime rounded up and murdered its political opponents after the 1973 coup, a UK Foreign Office propaganda unit passed material to Chile’s military intelligence and MI6 connived with a key orchestrator of the coup, newly declassified files show.
Foreign Office helped Pinochet regime to develop a counter-insurgency strategy based on British military campaigns in Southeast Asia
MI6 officer David Spedding was attached to British embassy in Santiago in 1972-4, and had relations with a key member of the military junta
The UK government assisted Chile’s military intelligence in the aftermath of the brutal 1973 coup against elected president Salvador Allende, newly declassified files show.
The assistance was authorised by the Information Research Department (IRD), a secret Foreign Office propaganda unit which worked closely with Britain’s secret intelligence service, MI6.
Foreign and Commonwealth Office building, Whitehall, London. Many a dark deed was planned here. (Photo accessed: Internet)
The IRD had long seen Allende as a political threat. As Declassified previously revealed, throughout the 1960s, the unit had sought to prevent Allende from ever becoming president through election interference and covert propaganda operations.
After Allende was elected in 1970, the IRD’s distribution of propaganda material became “strictly limited”, with the British embassy having fewer reliable contacts in the Chilean government.
This all changed after the coup.
In January 1974, the IRD began to “extend the distribution” of its material, which was now passed “to the Chilean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Government information organisations” and, crucially, the dictatorship’s “military intelligence” services.
At this time, Chile’s security forces – including the country’s intelligence apparatus – were responsible for massive human rights violations, including the widespread use of torture as a political weapon.
The UK government was under no illusions about this. As Foreign Office official Christopher Crabbie noted three months after the coup in December 1973, “I do not think that anyone seriously doubts that torture is going on in Chile”.
Reliable figures indicate that, between 1973 and 1988, Chilean state agents were responsible for over 3,000 deaths or disappearances and tens of thousands of cases of torture and political arrests. This was in a country which, in 1973, had a population of only 10 million people.
Chile Army 1973 coup soldiers watch detainees – many were shot, many more tortured then shot, many more still ‘disappeared’, probably tortured and shot. Many, many more were jailed where they were also tortured; young children were also abducted and given to fascist childless couples. (Photo accessed: Internet)
‘Hearts and minds’
The nature of the information passed to Chile’s military intelligence remains unclear, though the files suggest it may have included material for use in propaganda, research reports on left-wing activity, and even manuals on domestic security operations.
For instance, newly declassified files show how the UK government secretly helped the Chilean authorities to develop a counter-insurgency strategy, using techniques refined during Britain’s colonial interventions in Southeast Asia.
The idea for such assistance was first raised during the visit of British navy chief Sir Michael Pollock to Chile in late November 1973, two months after the coup.
The timing of Pollock’s visit was “politically tricky”, noted the British ambassador in Santiago, Reginald Secondé, since there was “much critical attention” being given “to the Chilean Government’s treatment of their political opponents”.
However, there were “two frigates and two submarines for the Chilean Navy under construction in British yards” – an arms deal worth around £50m – and “this was not a moment to prejudice the historic tradition of Anglo-Chilean naval friendship”.
“This was not a moment to prejudice the historic tradition of Anglo-Chilean naval friendship”
In Santiago, Pollock and Secondé met with a number of regime officials, including navy chief José Toribio Merino Castro, defence minister Patricio Carvajal Prado, and foreign minister Ismael Huerta.
With Huerta, the British officials spoke about the UK government’s “hearts and minds” campaign in Northern Ireland, a counter-insurgency strategy inspired by Britain’s war in Malaya (1948-60).
Huerta “seemed impressed with the concept”, and Secondé “later twice heard him muttering to himself ‘hearts and minds’”.
Subsequent meetings were held between Secondé, British information officer Tony Walters, and Captain Carlos Ashton, the director of overseas information in Chile’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Like Huerta, Ashton was “very receptive to the idea that this kind of approach to Chilean security problems might be the right answer”, and requested “details of what practical measures a ‘hearts and minds’ exercise would involve”.
Ashton’s request for assistance was forwarded to Rosemary Allott, the head of the IRD’s Latin American desk.
In a letter dated 15 February 1974 and marked ‘secret’, Allott agreed to provide the Chilean regime with counter-insurgency advice, but limited this to material on Britain’s past colonial interventions.
“In view of the delicate political considerations involved”, Allott wrote, “it would be best to confine, at this stage at least, the material we send you of insurgencies of the past, rather than those currently preoccupying HMG” such as Northern Ireland.
The Pinochet regime was soon issued with three books on British counter-insurgency strategy, alongside a “Manual of Counter Insurgency Studies”.
“Britain agreed to share its colonial policing methods with the Chilean junta”
Allott also tracked down “various official reports on Malaya” including “The Fight Against Communist Terrorism in Malaya”, the “Review of the Emergency in Malaya (1948-57)”, and “two booklets on the Philippines insurrection”.
Britain’s military campaign in Malaya involved the “resettlement” of over 500,000 civilians, aerial bombardment, and an intensive propaganda operation.
Embassy officials suggested that they were teaching Chilean officers “tactics of tolerance and magnanimity”. However, brutal repression often lay behind the UK government’s rhetoric about “winning hearts and minds”, and the Chilean authorities were only sharpening their repressive techniques.
None of the material given to the Pinochet regime was “for attribution to HMG”. This meant that the Chilean authorities could use the information but not source it to the UK government.
The extent to which Britain’s advice was acted upon remains unclear; the Pinochet regime was certainly not lacking in support from the CIA.
Nonetheless, it is clear that Britain agreed to share its colonial policing methods with the Chilean junta, with the goal of stabilising Pinochet’s regime against domestic opposition.
MI6 in Chile
Evidence of British assistance to Chile’s intelligence services raises further questions about what Britain’s own secret intelligence service, MI6, was doing in Chile.
In 1972, MI6 officer David Spedding was attached to the British embassy in Santiago – his only foreign posting outside of the Middle East throughout his career.
This was not Spedding’s first visit to Chile. As a postgraduate student at Oxford University during the mid-1960s, Spedding had spent his gap year in Santiago and found work as an assistant in the British embassy’s press office.
Spedding’s first role in the diplomatic service was thus in the same British embassy that had been directing covert propaganda operations against Allende throughout the 1960s. The job gave him “an entrée into SIS [MI6]”, historian Nigel West noted.
Spedding remained in Chile until September 1974. He was subsequently made responsible for MI6 operations across the Middle East, and would go on to become MI6 chief between 1994 and 1999.
‘Our relationship with Admiral Merino’
Spedding’s name rarely appears in declassified Foreign Office files on Chile.
Yet in one file, dated 4 December 1973, Spedding informed the Foreign Office that 2,800 civilians and 700 armed forces personnel had been killed during and after the coup.
“In order to protect our relationship with Admiral Merino”, Spedding noted, “we would not like these figures to be quoted, at least for the time being”.
Admiral Merino was one of the key orchestrators of the 1973 coup. He was head of the Chilean navy in September 1973, and remained in post until the fall of the dictatorship in 1990. Merino claimed responsibility for convincing Pinochet to join the coup.
Some of the culprits saluting (Photo accessed: Internet)
One of Spedding’s roles, then, was to ensure close collaboration with the Chilean junta by covering up its responsibility for massive political repression and human rights violations.
The MI6 station in Santiago was only closed down in 1974 amid the UK Labour Party’s return to government.
It would not be surprising if MI6 played a supporting role to the CIA’s covert operations against Allende during the early 1970s. It was recently revealed that the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) had “opened a base in Santiago to assist in the US Central Intelligence Agency’s destabilisation of the Chilean government” in 1971.
Britain’s secret assistance to the Pinochet regime was consistent with the UK government’s position on the coup.
The Conservative government under Edward Heath had welcomed the coup and rushed to give diplomatic recognition and arms to the Chilean junta, with the Foreign Office noting that it had “infinitely more to offer British interests than the one which preceded it”.
The coup against Allende inaugurated a 17-year dictatorship under General Augusto Pinochet, who only left office in 1990.
end.
John McEvoy is co-directing a forthcoming documentary investigating Britain’s hidden role in the death of Chile’s democracy and rise of the Pinochet dictatorship. You can support the film’s production here.
The photo of the massive antifascist rally in London on 28th July following a march from Russel Square shows the recapture of Trafalgar Square from Tommy Robinson and his sea of Union Jacks. Not for the first time, the Irish made their mark upon the place.
There the only two high flying flags were the Irish Tricolours and the Palestinian flags, the Irish contingent being one of the few on the day to see the fight in Britain against the fascists as part of the same fight against the fascist Zionist regime.
Irish and Palestinian flags in Trafalgar Square rally against racism, end July 2024 (Photo cred: PA)
We are mindful of the history of our occupied territories and our 1930s fight against the anti-Semitic Blackshirts1 in London (e.g. standing with the Jewish community at the Battle of Cable Street, 1936) and against the Bridgeton Billy Boys in Glasgow in the 1930s.2
On 28th July our flags sent out a message: We stand against all fascists, at home or abroad. That day we could not but remember all our brave men and women who marched past here from 1971 to 1998 carrying our fight to the heart of government3 in harder times.
We also know that the anti-racist movement now takes its new life from the strength of the Palestinian solidarity movement in Britain and needs to recognise this.
It was strange being in Trafalgar Square again with Tricolours given that we were barred from being there during the ‘Troubles’. Irish solidarity events were banned from using the Square under any circumstances from 1972 to 2001, well after the Good Friday Agreement.
The ban was lifted only once for an Irish event during that period and that was for the Peace Women4 (sic) calling for an ‘end to violence’ (mainly that of the Resistance) and famous US folk singer/ political activist Joan Baez displayed her ignorance of the Irish situation by speaking there.
It was interesting that a reporter for GB News of the British mass media was aware that a picket had been held in Dublin in protest against the assassinations of Palestinian and other Arab resistance leaders. He tried to link the Irish contingent in Trafalgar Square with ‘support for Hamas’.
The linkage was hinted in his broadcast report though he was careful enough not to report a direct link as the Irish group in Trafalgar Square had in fact no connection with the Dublin group. The reporter asked how to pronounce ‘Saoirse Don Phalaistín’ — but still got it wrong in his report.
One of the Irish contingent spoke to the young GB News journalist: He had the stuff from Dublin on his phone and wanted to say that the Irish in the Square were part of the Dublin group.
“Next thing you’d know the Zionists would call for a ban on the Irish for ‘supporting Hamas’”,5 commented one of the veteran Irish activists. “We also get targeted because of the flag and our placards.”
The UK State and the police are all pro-Zionist and the Zionist press tries to trap the Irish into dangerous statements but “We know our history and are well able for them; we just say we support Palestinian resistance to Israeli occupation just as we did with the British in Ireland.”
Irish contingent with flags on Palestine solidarity march to Downing Street very recently (not sure whether the SW person is part of it). (Photo sourced from participant).
The Irish Tricolours, often in the company of the Palestinian national flag with Saoirse Don Phalaistín printed on it have been seen on Palestine solidarity marches in London since the current Zionist genocide began but also on anti-fascist rallies and in support of Julian Assange.
This is in keeping with the history and tradition of the Irish in Britain who helped found the republican United Englishmen6, the Chartists,7 many trade unions, a section of the First International8 and also gave the British working class their anthem9 and their classic novel.10
Classic novel of the working class in Britain was written by Robert Noonan, aka Robert Tressell, from Dublin. (Image sourced: Internet)
In later times they were prominent in organising solidarity with Vietnam and of course Ireland, against repressive legislation and fascist organisations, solidarity with Nicaragua, Palestine etc. and in struggles against state repression, including within the jails.
The Prevention of Terrorism Act (1974), forerunner of the current Terrorism Act (2000) specifically targeted the Irish community in Britain with suspension of habeas corpus for a period of up to five days, refusal of access to solicitor, as did also the framing of a score of people.
In the midst of the Irish Hunger Strikes of 1981, the Irish community broke out of the State terror stranglehold and formed the Irish in Britain Representation Group, among its objectives being the abolition of the Labour Government-introduced Prevention of Terrorism Act.
End.
Saoirse don Phalaistín and Irish Tricolour flags on Palestine solidarity march this year photographed against Westminster’s ‘Big Ben’. (Photo cred: being investigated)
NOTE ON AUTHORS
Pat Reynolds is a former trade unionist, social worker, a veteran anti-racist, anti-fascist activist, also for Irish independence and for rights for the Irish community in Britain. He was PRO for the Irish in Britain Representation Group for two decades, founding the Haringey Branch and the Green Ink Bookshop. Reynolds is from Granard in Co. Longford and lives in London.
Diarmuid Breatnach is a former trade unionist, worker with homeless/ substance misusers (manual worker before that), also a veteran anti-racist, anti-fascist activist and campaigner for Irish independence. For a decade he was on the Ard-Choiste of the IBRG, founder of the Lewisham Branch and of the Lewisham Irish Centre. Breatnach is from Dublin to which he has returned to settle.
FOOTNOTES
1The British Union of Fascists led by Sir Oswald Moseley which had substantial support in the British elite, including the publisher of the The Daily Mail with police attacks on anti-fascists.
2The Billy Boys were founded and led by Billy Fullerton, a former member of the British Fascists. Fullerton also later became a member of the British Union of Fascists in the 1930s. The Billy Boys adopted a militaristic style of behaviour, marching on parades, forming their own bands, composing their own songs and music, and all dressed in a similar manner.[3] The Billy Boys also formed a junior group whose members were teenagers called the Derry Boys. (Wikipedia)
3From Trafalgar Square to the Houses of Parliament in Westminster runs a broad thoroughfare, in the centre of which is the Cenotaph and a little further, the entrance to Downing Street.
4The organisation/ campaign was founded by Betty Williams and Mairead Corrigan in 1976 after a car driven by an IRA fighter mortally wounded by British soldiers in Belfast crashed into pedestrians and mortally wounded three children of Anne Maguire, sister of Mairead. Branding itself as against all violence the Peace Women in fact targeted primarily the Republican movement, secondarily the Loyalist paramilitaries and hardly ever the Occupation Army. Williams accused the IRA unit of having fired on the Army unit that killed the driver which was untrue (but is repeated on her Wikipedia entry). Both founders received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1976 and a substantial cash prize. Williams resigned from the group in 1980 and disappeared from Irish-related activities though prominent externally. Corrigan however remained politically active in Ireland and elsewhere against war and has campaigned among other things for the end of the ‘Israeli’ siege on Gaza, being arrested with crew and passengers on the Spirit of Humanity aid ship in 2009 by by the Zionist navy, taken to ‘Israel’ and subsequently deported.
5Hamas is proscribed organisation in the UK since March 2001 and a person promoting it would be liable to prosecution under the Terrorism Act.
6A spin-off from the United Irishmen in Ireland; the English chapter led the Spithead and Nore naval mutinies. The Irish also reformed the United Scotsmen when it was faltering.
7Karl Marx called the Chartists “the true mass movement of the working class” – two of its principal leaders, Bronterre O’Brien and Fergus O’Connor were Irish, as their surnames would suggest.
8The Fenians were accepted into the First International Workingmen’s Association.
9The lyrics of The Red Flag were composed by Jim Connell from near Kells, Co. Meath and set to the brisk air of The White Cockade, later changed to the mournful air of Tannebaum.
10The Ragged-Trousered Philanthropists was written by Robert Tressell (real name Robert Noonan) from Dublin.
Prominent among the many words quoted from Theobald Wolfe Tone, ‘the father of Irish Republicanism’, are that ‘Our Strength shall come from that great and respectable class, the men of no property’.
The interpretation of those words has led to some confusion between socialism and republicanism.
Wolfe Tone, as he is normally known historically, co-founded the Society of United Irishmen in 1791, which led a mass armed uprising in 1798 against British Rule in Ireland, as a speaker said at the Anti-Imperialist Action’s oration at their annual commemoration at Tone’s grave last month.1
Tone himself was arrested on a French ship captured by the British Navy and despite his French Army officer rank, tried on treason charges and sentenced to death upon the gallows … but died instead in prison of a wound to his throat.
Wolfe Tone Monument, Stephens Green, Dublin (Photo cred: National Built Heritage Service)
An important part of the leadership of the United Irishmen, most of the Leinster Directorate was arrested in Dublin but the Rising went ahead in other parts of Ireland, notably Antrim, Wexford and Wicklow, and another with French troop reinforcements, too few and too late, in Mayo.
The Rising was crushed, the leaders executed or exiled, along with many of their followers. A large body of Irish traditional and folk song, mostly in English and much of it composed in its centenary, commemorates the struggle and sacrifice of the United Irishmen.
The AIA speaker: “Tone’s most important belief was that we must ‘break the connection with England’ by any means necessary – one of the most important teachings for the Revolutionary Republican Movement today,” to work “for National Liberation by any means we decide necessary”.
No-one who has even the most cursory acquaintance with the historic figure of Wolfe Tone can deny that he was determined to break away from English colonial rule and, once he became convinced there was no peaceful way to do so, was determined to do it by force or arms.
“Tone was also clear that the revolutionary struggle could only be successful,” continued the speaker, “if it was based on the masses of the Irish People, stating that, ‘Our Strength shall come from that great and respectable class, the men of no property’.”
From that, the speaker went on to claim that “we learn from Tone that the fight for our Republic is a class struggle and that the driving force of that struggle will be the working class fighting for their own liberation.”
I do not believe that the writings or recorded words of Wolfe Tone justify that interpretation. Indeed, it would have been strange if they had; the 1798 Rising was what Marxists describe as a “bourgeois revolution”, i.e. one led by a section of the capitalist class in its own class interests.2
Such also were the Revolutions in England of 1649 and 1688, of the French in 1789 and the American in 1765-1783, the Italian of 1848, the Chinese of the early Kuo Min Tang and the Latin American revolutions against the Spanish Empire, along with the Mexican 1910-1920.
Yes, the capitalist class, which is always telling us to employ only constitutional means to get what we need or want, tries to conceal that they themselves came to power by revolution.
Colorised illustration by unknown artist of the storming of the Bastille in July 1789 (Source: Wikipedia)
The leadership of the United Irishmen was almost totally of the established Anglican church or of Protestant sects – “Protestant and Dissenter”, in Tone’s words. They were descendants of settlers from Britain and they were of bourgeois social strata.
This section of the bourgeoisie and petit-bourgeoisie were fed up with restraints imposed from England on developing the colony’s potential, on a taxation system they considered unfair, on corruption in the Irish Parliament and in management by the Monarch’s representative in Ireland.
Being only a very small minority of the Irish population3 they were aware that they needed the mass behind them in order to build an independent national economy, for which they tried to gain Catholics admission to the Irish Parliament, which at the time only admitted Anglicans as MPs.
When Henry Grattan, who had earlier led quite a rebellious Irish Parliament,4 failed in the attempt to make Parliament more representative, Tone and many others became convinced that only revolution could progress society in Ireland and from then on he strove to bring that about.
Grattan
Statue of Henry Grattan, failed reformer of the Irish Parliament, situated in Dame Street junction with Grafton Street and facing Trinity College. (Photo cred: Trip Advisor)
A revolution against England, a great European naval power, even with the help of revolutionary France, would require mass participation and support, as the AIA speaker remarked at the commemoration. So Tone aspired to the unity of “Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter.”
The section of the religions that most fell into the category of the “men of no property” were of course the Catholics, dispossessed of their lands and under Penal Laws of the Occupation. Without the support of the Catholic majority there was no chance of a successful revolution.
Tone may well have been a most democratic Republican in favour of all kinds of progressive social reform but nowhere in his writing does he advocate the overthrow of the bourgeoisie, seizure of private property and the setting up of a socialist system to be run by the working class.
united men
Reenactment of the United Irishmen in battle, depicting the “men (and women) of no property. (Photo sourced: Internet)
Theobald Wolfe Tone was a courageous democratic revolutionary, anti-colonial and a martyred patriot but was not nor could have been a socialist leader. That which he was, was the best of his time and among the best we had to offer and there is no need to try to make him something else.
The United Irishmen represented a section of the Irish bourgeoisie that was truly Republican and revolutionary. That section of society was mostly of settler descent since the mass of the native and Catholic population had been ground down and oppressed.
Thereafter most of the native Irish bourgeoisie developed as a subservient client class, “Castle Catholics” ag sodar i ndiaidh na n-uaisle,5 up to whatever “cute hoor”6 and gombeen7 tricks they could get up to but without a fraction of the spine necessary to fight for real independence.
A successful Irish national revolution does indeed need to be led by the Irish working class as demonstrated by what James Connolly – rather than Wolfe Tone – observed: “Only the Irish working class remain as the incorruptible inheritors of the fight for freedom in Ireland.”
The reason for that, as outlined by Connolly, is quite simple: the working class is the only social class of any size that has nothing to gain from compromise and betrayal of the revolution.
Some other key points laid down by Tone, continued the speaker, include that Republicanism is Anti Imperialist and it is Internationalist. Our struggle in Ireland is part of a wider international struggle of oppressed people against occupation, colonialism and imperialism.
Tone understood this when he looked to Revolutionary France to support the 1798 uprising.
This was well understood by Irish Republicans of Tone’s time who celebrated the fall of the Bastille in 1789 and the defeat of the English by the settlers in America. The United Irishmen also helped the creation of the United Englishmen and led two of the British Navy’s most serious mutinies.8
Today, continued the speaker, Republicans must fight our struggle while also supporting Liberation struggles around the world in the belief that every blow struck against imperialism brings our victory closer.
So from Palestine to the Philippines and from India to the Basque Country, and everywhere people take a stand against NATO, the Revolutionary Republican movement must raise our cries in solidarity.
End.
Footnotes
1The event was organised by Anti-Imperialist Action, a socialist republican organisation, with the oration being given on behalf of the organisation. A pilgrimage to Wolfe Tone’s grave in Bodenstown is a fixture on the calendars of most Irish Republican organisations.
2This should not be taken as a criticism since Marxists agree that many bourgeois revolutions were progressive in their time.
3Tiny, in the case of the Anglicans in particular; the Presbyterians were much more numerous.
6An admiring description in Ireland for one who manages to benefit by dubious means.
7Corruption of an Irish language term for the ‘carpet bagger’ types who benefited amidst the disaster of the Great Hunger in the mid 19 Century, snapping up land in particular at the lowest of prices.
The Irish Tricolour has been in the news recently in an unhappy circumstance. The flag was featured borne in a group of anti-immigration racists carrying a banner declaring Coolock Says No,1 next to Union Jacks2 and Loyalist flags at a Belfast riot.
This was a bizarre juxtaposition given that Loyalists are hostile to any signs of Irish Republicanism, of which the Tricolour is chief among its historical symbols. Furthermore, the Unionist state banned its public display in most situations between 1954 and 1987 leading to resistance and arrests.3
In the sectarian society created by the British in its occupied Six County colony, the Tricolour is burned annually on British Loyalist bonfires and is reviled by Unionism and its more extreme progeny, Loyalism, which in turn is associated with state-sanctioned sectarian murder gangs.4
The strange juxtaposition was remarked upon in mass media not only in Ireland (both sides of the Border) but even in Britain — and Irish State Taoiseach (prime minister) Simon Harris remarked that he found the flag in association with racism to be “repugnant”.5
But does Harris have the moral right to make that comment?
Origin and History of the Irish Tricolour
The Tricolour as we know it and its use dates from its sewing in silk by revolutionary women in Paris in 1848 and presentation to a delegation of the Young Irelanders, a revolutionary Irish Republican group of that period and its subsequent unfurling in Ireland by Thomas Meagher.
Thomas Francis Meagher as captain in the Union Army (Source: Drawing in Library of Congress, USA)
Irish revolutionary Thomas Francis Meagher was convicted by the English Occupation of sedition during trials around the planning and carrying out of the Irish Rising of 1848 and, with death sentence commuted, transported to Australia as a felon, from which he escaped to the USA in 1852.
As the American Civil War approached, Meagher, along with most of the Irish in the USA took the side of the Union, leaving only a rump following Mitchell, formerly a comrade of the Young Irelanders, to side with the slave-owning Confederacy in the conflict.
Meagher not only fought in the Union Army in the American Civil War against the slave-owning Confederacy, gaining the rank of Brigadier but he and his wife raised a regiment, the 69th New York Infantry, unofficially called The Irish Brigade or even Mrs. Meagher’s Own.
Plaque in Lower Abbey Street (opp. side of Abbey Theatre) to the first unveiling of the Irish Tricolour in Dublin, 1848. (Source: Internet)
The Young Irelanders were Republicans and the Tricolour was always seen not only as embodying the unity of all in Ireland, regardless of origin, against the British occupation but also for national liberation, against Monarchy and for complete separation of Church and State.
In addition, it had a strong internationalist element in that it was associated with revolution throughout Europe, presented to us in solidarity by French revolutionary women and flown alongside French Tricolours in Ireland at celebrations of the French revolution of 1848.
It was the principal flag of Irish anti-fascism too in the 1930s when Irish Republicans fought the fascist Blueshirts on Irish streets and a number of them went to fight in defence of the Spanish Republic against the fascist military coup of Franco and his Nazi German and Italian Fascist allies.
More recently when Irish Republicans and socialists mobilised against the attempts of the Irish ruling class to promote NATO and to ease cooperation with that alliance of Western imperialism, Harris also ranted against supporters of Anti-Imperialist Action flying of the Irish Tricolour.
The Tricolour among Loyalists was of course newsworthy and was covered by Irish mainstream media and Unionist mouthpiece The Belfast Telegraph along with photos by The Guardian on line. But all without comment on its presence in Palestine solidarity events in London.
Irish Tricolours have been flown at every current Palestine solidarity march in London (ten of them at the most recent London march) and, along with Saoirse Don Phalaistín printed on the Palastinian flag, have been seen also at university solidarity encampments and at events to free Julian Assange.
Section of Palestine solidarity protest at Barclays Bank, Tottenham Road, London on 24th April this year, showing Irish Tricolour and Saoirse Don Phalaistín flags. Zionists and British fascists are united in opposition to them across the road. (Photo cred: Northern Times)
The Tricolour Flown by Racists and Fascists?
Given its origins and history, why is the Tricolour being flown by fascists?
In recent years it seemed that whenever one saw a crowd with Tricolours among them, it was most likely a fascist or at least racist-led event. One reason for this is that the fascists historically try to portray themselves as nationalists, i.e organising ‘for the nation’.
In all cases historically, the “nation” represented by the fascists turned out to be that of the ruling class, the financial and industrial elite – never that of the working people, not even of those sections of the lower middle class that supported the rise of fascist movements.
Fascists however have also frequently colluded with the invader of their nation, for example with the Nazis in Europe, particularly in France, Greece, Yugoslavia, Ukraine.6 The fascists in Ireland today represent the neo-colonial,7 colonial and imperialist financial-industrial interests in Ireland.
Racist group from Dublin suburb finds common cause with British Loyalists in Belfast anti-immigration demonstration and riots 3 August 2024 (Photo cred: Irish News)
In that context, the unity of fascists from the Twenty-Six Counties with Loyalists from the Six Counties is not surprising, nor even with notorious English fascist Tommy Robinson. Prominent Irish fascists have had friendly interactions with Loyalist Jim Dowson and British fascist Farrage.
Portraying themselves as saviours of the nation, as moral guardians etc., just as the German Nazis did in the 1930s is hypocritical but absolutely necessary for them. If they revealed the class interests they represent and the kind of regime they really want, where would they get supporters?
The fascists are few and need those supporters, their easily-led mobs and stormtroopers. It is among sections of the down-trodden in society that they will find them, the ignorant, marginalised, abandoned by the capitalist system but all too often by the liberals and the Left also.
Substance addiction, mental illness, crime and cultural poverty is rife in these communities and it is sections of those who are presented with false enemies – migrants, LGBT people, muslims – by false saviours masquerading as patriots. Many in those communities are ripe for manipulation.
But the attempted takeover of the Tricolour and subversion has not occurred by Fascist manipulation and through historical and political ignorance alone.
When antifascists mobilise, rarely is the Tricolour seen amongst them, assisting the impression that it is the racists and fascists that are representing the nation. Understandably, Anarchists may not wish to fly the flag of a state and socialists may feel that the flag is representing a capitalist state.
Often too in the past, Republicans have been absent from antifascist mobilisations but on occasion too went to them ready for physical confrontation and therefore without flags. But what message do antifascists think is presented by Palestinian flags among them and Tricolours on the other side?8
Invited to speak at a conference on anti-fascism in Dublin some years ago, I raised the question of the appropriation of the Tricolour by fascists and how it was necessary for the antifascists to show it among themselves also but my recommendation did not win approval9.
It is depressing to see that the situation has not noticeably improved in this regard some years later.
A welcome recent exception to the rule: a number of Irish flags including the Tricolour among antifascists outnumbering fascists and racists in Dundalk, Co. Louth on 4 August 2024 (the day following the Belfast racist riots). The fascists and racists had to be escorted out of town by the Public Order Unit of the Gardaí (Source photo: Anti-Imperialist Action FB site)
The Irish state and the Tricolour
It took some time for the Tricolour to be adopted as the national flag in the Republican movement until its fluttering above the GPO at the Henry Street Corner during the 1916 Rising.10 Thereafter it represented the forces of national liberation in the War of Independence (1991-’21).
The Irish Tricolour (Photo cred.: Getty Images)
Facing treason and counter-revolution in 1922, it was the flag of the Anti-Treaty forces, the neo-colonial traitors only flying it in order to deny it to the Irish Republicans. Despite that fact it has remained the flag of Irish Republicanism, irreconcilable with neo-colonialism, racism or fascism.
Republican women activists of Cumann na mBan designed ‘Easter Lilly’ paper lapel pins to raise funds for dependants of Republicans imprisoned or killed during the Civil War and they did so in the colours of the Irish Tricolour: Green, White and Orange. The emblem is worn to this day.
The counter-revolutionary faction that spawned the fascist Blueshhirts11 did not formally adopt the Tricolour as the State flag in law, that was done by the next wave of counter-revolution, Fianna Fáil,12 while in government, situating it in the 1937 Constitution.
The Tricolour is in a sense the flag of everyone in Ireland who does not reject it or defile it but evidently too, in its origins and among those who bore it forward, it is anathema to racism.
Furthermore, it is symbolically anathema to colonialism, loyalism, neo-colonialism and monarchy. Clearly the Tricolour is not legitimately the flag of racists and fascists but neither is it of the gombeen regime that flies it; Harris and the neo-colonial State claiming it is also repugnant.
Effigy of Simon Harris showing the bloody hands of collusion in the ‘Israeli’ genocide against Palestinians at a Palestine solidarity protest last weekend (organised by Mothers Against Genocide, North Wicklow Against Genocide, Arklow Against Zionism) at the annual Bray Air Show which features UK Military fliers. (Photo cred: Aisling Hudson)
End.
FOOTNOTES
1Coolock (from the Irish place-name An Chúlóg) is a Dublin city suburban district that has seen riots and arson recently against plans to house refugees in a disused factory building there.
2Common name for the flag of the United Kingdom, more derogatorily known as ‘The Butcher’s Apron’, featuring heraldic cross and salterres of the nations of England, Scotland and Ireland (Wales had already been conquered and incorporated into the Kingdom of England).
4Such as the Ulster Defence Association and the Ulster Volunteer Force (see also ‘the Glennane Gang’) which targeted most of their victims on the assumption of their being of the Catholic faith but also occasionally those from the Protestant community they considered disloyal (see ‘the Shankill Butchers’) or with which they were in competition around gang crime. All operated with colonial police and British Army assistance.
6These fascist groups supplied police and auxiliary units to the Nazi occupation, collecting information on the antifascist Resistance and on fugitive Jews and Roma. In some cases, as in Ukraine, they also acted as prison and concentration camp guards (but their chief leader, Stepan Bandera, was nominated as a national hero by the current Kiyv regime).
7Sometimes called ‘comprador capitalist’ or ‘client regime’, a term describing a state that is nominally independent but is under the actual domination of an external state or states. The Irish state has been in turn dominated by Britain, the USA and the EU imperialists.
8This is an issue on Palestine solidarity marches and pickets upon which I have also commented before.
9A speaker from a very sectarian migrant group ridiculed the idea but no-one else spoke up in support.
10Incidentally, at the other corner of the GPO above Princes Street in 1916 flew the green flag with the words “Irish Republic” inscribed upon it in white and gold letters, which had been created for the occasion in the home of Constance Markievicz, socialist revolutionary of a settler landowning family and born in London. And the man who erected it was Argentinian-born-and-raised Eamon Bulfin. It is ironical in the extreme that this flag also is sometimes brandished by Irish racists opposing immigration.
11Irish fascist organisation officially called the Army Comrades Association (later The National Guard), led by former Gárda Commissioner Eoin O’ Duffy which later joined with two conservative parties to form the current Fine Gael, currently in the Coalition Government with its erstwhile opposition Fianna Fáil and the Green Party.
12A major split from Sinn Féin in the early 1930s, currently in the Coalition Government with its erstwhile opposition Fine Gael and the Green Party.
Earlier this month there was an oration delivered at the grave of Wolfe Tone1 which contained some important elements which deserve inspection and discussion.
– The path to rebuild our struggle is the development of an Anti Imperialist Broad Front – said the speaker. – A United Front of Revolutionary republicans, working in cooperation to advance our common republican objectives and to achieve a common republican programme.
Looking around us at the parties and groups in the socialist and republican spectrum, the ostensibly revolutionary varieties, we see that for many of them, building up their own organisation takes precedence over anything else, including revolution – for them the revolution IS their party.
Speaker giving oration at Wolfe Tone’s grave in front of the monument, faced by colour party. (Photo: RSM)
The call given in this oration runs counter to that kind of thinking. “But we’ve heard all that about ‘unity’ before,” a reader might say. Yes we have and often “unity” meant only “unity” around that particular party or, even more often, around this or that leadership.
There is nothing of that to be found in this address “recognising and respectful of the autonomy and independence of the groups and independents involved”. “Hmmm,” the reader might say “but is it a genuine intention?” Given our experience, it’s a valid and important question.
The most dependable test is in the practice. The speaker of the oration at its annual Wolfe Town Commemoration2 was representing the Socialist Republican Movement organisation (more often manifested publicy in recent years in the form of the Anti-Imperialist Action broad group3)
As an independent revolutionary activist for many years I have often participated in AIA’s actions and at times they have supported actions of which I had been part of organising. I have found that their practice matches their words and there is no truer test.
The speaker followed with practical suggestions for the implementation of the broad front: Trust and co-operation must be developed … through activism and the development of National Republican Campaigns that can be taken up by all Republican groups and independents …
There are many campaigns that could be developed from support for POWs to opposing internment and extradition, environmental campaigns such as (overcoming) the unacceptable situation at Lough Neagh, to campaigns thatoppose the British and NATO presence in Ireland.
One of the banners in the crowd at the event in Bodenstown. (Photo: RSM)
Such a Republican Broad Front would be a fitting tribute to our Patriot Dead, the speaker added, to martyrs like Cathal Brugha,4 who gave his all in fighting for the sovereign, Independent Irish Republic and gave his life on this day in 1922 as a hero in the war in defence of the Republic.
In many of the pleas for unity of the fragmented resistance in Ireland, individuals have called for a conference to form a united front, others called for a unity document of principles around which to unite while in at least one case, two distinct organisations merged.
I have for years spoken out against such endeavours and advocated as a first step unity in practice. If organisations and individuals are not capable of that step, what kind of unity can they achieve around discussion of documents? Unity in practice also helps to break down distrust.
The speaker at the Wolfe Tone commemoration takes the same line, presumably speaking for the SRM when he does so and one supposes that this will continue to be the approach of the AIA in campaigns such as against internment, in solidarity with political prisoners5 or with Palestine.6
The above piece discussed two elements of the oration given by the SRM earlier this month which I believe to be of great revolutionary importance and in need of application in Ireland, one in advocating a principle and the other in suggesting avenues for practical application.
Later I will be taking a look at some other elements in that talk (the text of which, as published by the SRM, I attach as an appendix).
Beirimís bua.
(Image sourced: Internet)
End.
FOOTNOTES
1Wolfe Tone, born into settler stock and of the Establishment Anglican congregation, was a leading figure in the formation of the revolutionary republican organisation The Society of United Irishmen, seeking “to unite Catholic, Protestant (i.e Anglican) and Dissenter” (i.e the other sects, Presbyterian, Methodist, Unitarian, Quaker etc.) to “break the connection with England. In 1798, the year of the Unitedmen uprising, the first of many Irish Republican uprisings and campaigns, Tone was captured by the British Navy on a French warship and, despite his French officer rank, tried and sentenced to death.
Tone died in jail some months before his brother Matthew was taken prisoner during the surrender at Ballinamuck (Baile na Muc) in Co. Longford of another French expedition to Ireland, late and too small, at the tail end of the Rising that year. Also ignoring his officer POW status, he was hanged in Dublin and his body reputedly thrown into the mass grave at Croppies’ Acre in Dublin city.
2Since even earlier than Thomas Davis’ (1814-1845) song In Bodenstown Churchyard, Irish Republican organisations and individuals have been making the pilgrimage to that grave in County Meath, at times with thousands in attendance.
3Also for an intense time as the Revolutionary Housing League in its attempt to spark a movement of occupation of empty properties to overcome the widely-acknowledged housing crisis in Ireland.
4Cathal Brugha (nee Burgess), son of a mixed Catholic-Protestant marriage, was a leading figure in Irish nationalist movement and in Republican rebellion in the last decades of the 19th and early decades of the 20th Centuries, learned Irish as a member of the Gaelic League, member of the Irish Republican Brotherhood (which he later left, considering it undemocratic), officer in the Irish Volunteer, 2nd in command in the South Dublin Union in 1916 served as Minister for Defence in the revolutionary government from 1919 to 1922, Ceann Comhairle of Dáil Éireann in January 1919 and its first president from January 1to April 1919, Chief of Staff of the IRAfrom 1917 to 1918. He served as a TD (electe parliamentary representative) from 1918 to 1922. He was mortally wounded by Irish Government troops in the early days of the Irish Civil War.
5Both on their own and for example in support of the Ireland Anti-Internment Campaign.
6Both on their own and for example as part of the Saoirse Don Phalaistín broad front.
APPENDIX
The following is the text of the main oration of which some sections are discussed in the preceding article and more to be discussed anon. It was delivered at the annual Wolfe Tone Commemoration at Bodenstown, organised by the Revolutionary Irish Socialist Republican Movement on Sunday July 7, 2024 and published on its Telegram page.
A Chairde is a chomrádaithe,
Táimid anseo i relig bodenstown ag uaimh ár n-athair, Wolfe Tone agus táimid ag rá go bhfuil an gluaisteacht a bhunaigh sé fós beo, agus tá sé ag fás arís.
Wolfe Tone is the father of Irish Republicanism. We come here each year not just for commemoration, but like Pearse, Connolly, Mellows and Costello before us, we come because we believe that the ideas and the vision that Tone put forward of a free independent Ireland is as relevant today as they were in the 1790s and because we believe that by remaining true to the teachings of Wolfe Tone we can build a revolutionary movement that will successfully free our country. Maybe not today, but our freedom is inevitable.
Tone’s most important belief was that we must ‘break the connection with England’ by any means necessary. It is for this reason that he established revolutionary military-political organisation the United Irishmen in 1791 and led a mass armed uprising in 1798 against British Rule in Ireland.
Tone was also clear that the revolutionary struggle could only be successful if it was based on the masses of the Irish People, stating that, ‘Our Strength shall come from that great and respectable class, the men of no property’.
And in these two simple quotes from Wolfe Tone, we have two of the most important teachings for the Revolutionary Republican Movement today. Firstly, that Republicans must work as a priority for National Liberation by any means we decide necessary.
That we must break the connection with England and defeat all forms of Imperialism in Ireland to establish a sovereign, Independent, Irish Republic.
And secondly, we learn from Tone that the fight for our Republic is a class struggle and that the driving force of that struggle will be the working class fighting for their own liberation.
These are two key teachings that when deviated from lead to compromise and the selling out of our revolution.
It is the duty of all of us here today and of all Republicans across Ireland, to ensure that the struggle for national liberation is kept at the fore of our revolutionary republican objectives and that we work tirelessly to achieve it and to ensure that our movement remains centred on and driven by the working class.
Some other key points laid down by Tone include that Republicanism is Anti Imperialist and it is Internationalist. Our struggle in Ireland is part of a wider international struggle of oppressed people against occupation, colonialism and imperialism.
Tone understood this when he looked to Revolutionary France to support the 1798 uprising. Today, Republicans must fight our struggle while also supporting Liberation struggles around the world in the belief that every blow struck against imperialism brings our victory closer.
So from Palestine to the Philippines and from India to the Basque Country, and everywhere people take a stand against NATO, the Revolutionary Republican movement must raise our cries in solidarity. The tide of revolution is rising in the world and there is much to be optimistic about.
But as revolutionaries we also have to be realistic. Since the time of Wolfe Tone the tide of revolutionary Republicanism has ebbed and flowed.
After the days of Tone and Emmet and the final defeat of the United Irishmen in 1805, Republicanism was reduced to an ember, spoken about in quiet corners until the birth of Young Ireland and the uprisings of 1848 and 1849 when revolutionaries such as Thomas Davis, Fintan Lalor, James Stephens and John O’Mahony would carry forward the vision of Tone, take up the hard work of rebuilding the Republican Movement and become the spark that would renew the Revolutionary fire, giving birth to Fenianism and the struggle that has carried us until today.
And today, we are 26 years on from the surrender of 1998, a surrender that had a devastating effect on the movement. Later this month it will be 19 years since the Provisionals ended their armed campaign.
These two great betrayals have led to the situation where the movement is fractured and split.
The revolutionary forces, though active, are scattered and there is mistrust between Republicans, whether in different groups or independents across Ireland, and this mistrust and division is exploited by our enemies.
It is a situation that all Republicans want to reverse and one of the revolutionary priorities in this phase of our struggle to overcome.
Comrades, like the revolutionary republicans after the defeat of the United Irishmen and Young Ireland, we find ourselves with the hard and gruelling task of rebuilding and reasserting the revolutionary republican struggle.
And the path to rebuild our struggle is the development of an Anti Imperialist Broad Front. A United Front of Revolutionary republicans, recognising and respectful of the autonomy and independence of the groups and independents involved, working in cooperation to advance our common republican objectives and to achieve a common republican programme. This is what our enemies most fear.
But again, this will not just happen overnight.
Trust and co-operation must be developed and we assert that this will be best achieved through activism and the development of National Republican Campaigns that can be taken up by all Republican groups and independents in a unity of purpose, that shows the real and forgotten strength of the Republican Movement.
There are many campaigns that could be developed from support for POWs to opposing internment and extradition, environmental campaigns such as the unacceptable situation at Lough Neagh, to campaigns that oppose the British and NATO presence in Ireland.
Such a Republican Broad Front would be a fitting tribute to our Patriot Dead, to martyrs like Cathal Brugha, who gave his all in fighting for the sovereign, Independent Irish Republic and gave his life on this day in 1922 as a hero in the war in defence of the Republic.
Over the last seven years we have put down a solid foundation as a movement. We have reasserted Irish Socialist Republicanism as the driving force of Revolution in Ireland.
We have recruited a new generation of republicans not damaged by the 1998 surrender who are now working with more experienced republicans to drive the struggle on.
While we can be happy with these achievements, the Republic needs more from each and every one of us and we all need to ask what we as individuals can do to carry the struggle forward.
Now is the time to move to the next phase of development in our revolutionary struggle, unsurprisingly by taking it back to Tone. Now is the time to strengthen and embed ourselves in the people of no property and to engage in systematic Republican Community work across the country.
In doing so, we would do well to return to Seamus Costello and the oration that he delivered from this spot in 1966, signalling the rise of Socialist Republicanism within the Movement. Costello outlined how it was the duty of all republicans to be active in our community.
How we should be involved in community groups, trade unions, tenants and residents associations, sporting, cultural and educational organisations and how we must take and assert our revolutionary republican position within them.
This is a task for all revolutionary republicans. Look at the groups in your area and see which ones your involvement in would advance the strengthening of Socialist Republicanism in your community.
Where no such groups exist, establish them. Where help is needed reach out to us as we have experienced comrades who excel in this area that would be happy to help in this work.
To conclude the comrades, this is a brief outline of our tasks in the time ahead.
While these plans will be deepened with discussion and debate within the movement, no one should leave this graveyard thinking there is no work for them to do, and the responsibility is on you to come forward and volunteer instead of waiting for others to come and ask you.
Our work is to free Ireland and our people by any means necessary to establish the 32 county All Ireland Socialist Republic, sovereign, independent, Gaelic and free, and we will not be stopped.
Redouble your efforts comrades, onwards to the Republic of 1916.
Meta, the company that runs the social media platform Facebook, is banning1 the use of the word Zionism by FB users, claiming the word is used interchangeably with ‘Israel’ and Jewry and is ‘anti-semitic’ and that their ban is in defence of Jews.
The word Zionism is often used in connection with Israel but it does not follow that its use is synonymous with Judaism or that it is therefore antisemitic, any more than to use the word “Nazism” in the 1930s and 1940s would have necessarily been anti-German.
The word ‘Zionism’ is associated with the state of ‘Israel’ for a very good reason – it was founded precisely as a Zionist project, a homeland for people of Judaic background. Palestine happened to be already occupied and so the initiative became also a European settler project in the Middle East.
Christians who support the project for religious – as distinct from political — reasons, mostly in the US, are also regularly described as “Zionist Christians” and form the majority of US Zionists.
But Zionism, rather than describing a religious movement, is essentially political. The Israeli State gives right of citizenship to those from anywhere who can prove being of Judaic background but does not require them to practice the religion or, in fact, to believe any Judaic tenet.
A Gallup survey in 2015 had 65% of Israelis self-identifying as being either “not religious” or “convinced atheists”, while 30% identified as being “religious”. More recently, polls found only 55% identifying as non-secular.
But its Jewish citizens being religious or not, the State is Jewish and the result of a Zionist movement with 19th -Century origins.
Of course, not all Israelis are Jewish either – there are also Muslims, Christians of various Eastern varieties and some western, Druze and others.
The Israeli State came into being on 14 May 1948 as a Zionist state, the culmination of decades of Zionist planning and search for a location, also a settlement project in Palestine promoted by British imperialism and a terrorist campaign against the indigenous Palestinians.
Theodor Herzel, key founder of Zionist Movement and author of Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State) and one of his statements. (Image sourced: Internet)
“The political movement was formally established by the Austro-Hungarian journalist Theodor Herzl in 1897 following the publication of his book Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State).
“At that time, Herzl believed that Jewish migration to Ottoman Palestine, particularly among poor Jewish communities, unassimilated and whose ‘floating’ presence caused disquiet, would be beneficial to assimilated European Jews and Christians.
“Political Zionism was in some respects a dramatic break from the two thousand years of Jewish and rabbinical tradition.
“Deriving inspiration from other European nationalist movements, Zionism drew in particular from a German version of European enlightenment thought, with German nationalistic principles becoming key features of Zionist nationalism.
“Although initially one of several Jewish political movements offering alternative responses to Jewish assimilation and antisemitism, Zionism expanded rapidly. In its early stages, supporters considered setting up a Jewish state in the historic territory of Palestine.
“After World War II and the destruction of Jewish life in Central and Eastern Europe where these alternative movements were rooted, it became dominant in the thinking about a Jewish national state.
“During this period, Zionism would develop a discourse in which the religious, non-Zionist Jews of the Old Yishuv who lived in mixed Arab-Jewish cities were viewed as backwards in comparison to the secular Zionist New Yishuv.”
Jewish use of the word
It was the Jewish Zionists who tried to equate Judaism with Zionism, an effort that was initially repudiated by many (probably most) Jews around the world prior to the Holocaust. After that and in particular with the creation of ‘Israel’, the majority seemed to identify with the Israeli state.
But there was always opposition to that among Jews, including famous ones. The Jewish historian of nationalism Hans Kohn argued that Zionism nationalism “had nothing to do with Jewish traditions; it was in many ways opposed to them”.2
Zionism had its critics from early on and the cultural Zionist Ahad Ha’am in the early 20th century wrote that there was no creativity in Herzl’s Zionist movement, and that its culture was European and specifically German.3
“He viewed the movement as depicting Jews as simple transmitters of imperialist European culture.”4
In recent decades the Zionists worked harder to demonise anti-Zionist Jews, calling them “self-hating Jews” and hounding those who spoke out against Zionism and the apartheid and genocide of the Israeli state, even destroying the employment prospects of such academics.
However, increasingly non-Israeli Jews around the world, including some commentators think the majority of their youth in the USA, are non-Zionist and even anti-Zionist. Many have been prominent in Palestine solidarity and anti-Israel actions.
A well-established Jewish sect that rejects Zionism and therefore the State of Israel. (Image sourced: Internet)
Jews using the term “Zionism” seem to be clear about its meaning and increasingly tend to identify themselves as either Zionist or Anti-Zionist. But most Jews in Israel might be considered ‘Zionist’ in the de facto sense of special ethnic entitlement status and occupation of Palestinian land.
Meta’s ban on use of the word on its social media platform therefore has nothing to do with defending Jews from anti-Semitism and in fact is aligning itself with the Zionist coercion of Jews from which a large section around the world are escaping.
By equating Judaism with Zionism, with the genocidal actions of the Israeli State, Meta is actually strengthening anti-Semitic thinking in many parts of the world.
Jews in solidarity with Palestine and therefore presumably anti-Zionist, photographed on Palestine Solidarity march in London recently. (Photo: Morning Star)
Non-Jewish Use of the word
It may be that not everyone is clear on the difference between Jews and Zionists but the likelihood is that despite obfuscation by the Zionists themselves, most understand the difference.
It is also possible that some may disguise their anti-Semitism by denouncing Zionists when they mean “Jews”.
Even so, that cannot serve as an excuse for banning the use of an appropriately descriptive and historical word, one in addition based on a political movement created — and practice carried out — by Jewish Zionists themselves.
Effect of the ban
The immediate effect of the ban is to increase the one-sided censorship which is already prevalent in the West, sheltering the European Settler State in the Middle East from much criticism for its genocidal policy and actions against the Palestinians.
The effect of that “sheltering” (and in many cases its objective) is to assist that state to continue its genocide and also to facilitate the western states’ support for that genocide in politics, journalism, sport, culture, trade, finance and armament.
The longer-term effect will be to energise the search for other platforms that will not impose such bans on speech. Already Telegram is gaining many users on both Right and Left ends of the political spectrum. This does not mean however that the State cannot find the means to spy on them.
Those wishing to use terms that describe what the western imperialists do not wish described may abandon platforms owned by Meta in favour of others, at the same abandoning many mainstream Meta users to the dominant discourse and ideology.
Meta previously banned the word Shaheed, meaning “martyr”, which it lifted after a period of a year. This is a term regularly used by the Palestinians to describe their dead, their fallen Resistance fighters but also the huge number of civilians killed by the Israeli Occupation Forces.
The term is also used in a similar way in relation to other other Arab resistance groups from the Lebanon to Yemen. Meta suspends accounts or closes them for promotion of resistance organisations (termed “terrorists” by Western states) across the globe, not only in the Middle East.
Ex-Minister for Home Affairs for the UK Suella Braverman attempted to ban the slogan “From the river to the sea” in Palestine solidarity context,5 claiming that because it encapsulated the desire for a Palestinian state, it was anti-Israeli and therefore anti-Semitic, a giant anti-logical leap.
A small group of anti-Zionist protesters in ‘Israel’ some weeks ago was suppressed by Israeli police and one of the latter was filmed loudly declaring that any placard or banner including the word “genocide” would be removed, an attitude mirrored by police in Germany.
People, including supporters of Juedische Stimme (Jewish Voice), a Jewish organisation, gather for a ‘Global South United’ protest to demand freedom for Palestine on 28 October 2023 in Berlin, Germany. [Getty]
Challenging Israeli atrocity hoaxes of the Palestinian resistance beheading babies or mass raping Israeli women has also drawn fire and accusations of “anti-Semitism”. Placard representations likening Israeli actions to those of the Nazis were often suppressed in the West.6
The issue of banning publication of certain words is not an easy one though liberal and social-democratic trends present it uncritically. We may object to the use of any of a huge number of racist epithets, for example and understand that these can be used to build up racist cultures.
However, when the State is asked to ban these and other kinds of speech, it is in effect being publicly empowered to ban what is in the interests of the elite to ban, i.e those words that convey unpleasant images of the ruling class, however valid.
“Property speculator”, “vulture capitalists”, “imperialists”, “colonialists”, “sectarian”, “collaborators”, “quisling” and “settlers” could be on a future list for banning under “hate speech”, along with combinations of words such as “police” with “brutality” or “politician” with “corrupt”.
Liberals and social-democrats tend to forget at times where the real power lies and what interests are served by the State.
Meta’s ban will be circumvented in many ways of course but it represents a major attack in social media on democratic freedom, all in the service of a genocidal colonial state which itself is in the service of imperialism.
(The following text is taken with minor organisational editing from Resistance News Network as are also the images)
(Reading time: 3 mins.)
On April 8th, we commemorate the anniversary of the martyrdom of one of Palestine’s foundational resistance leaders in 1948, the eternal Martyr Abdulqader Al-Husseini, who gave his life in the noble pursuit of our people’s liberation.
(Image sourced: Resistance News Network)
From childhood, Al-Husseini witnessed the beginnings of the colonial zionist project in Palestine and its implementation at the hands of the British. As he grew older, he became actively involved in organizing protests and demonstrations against the British occupiers.
After completing his secondary studies in Egypt, he returned to Al-Quds in 1933, and received a job in the land department. This job meant he was able to not only learn about the plans of land theft by the zionists, but also get close to the people of the villages.
That same year, Abdelqader and other Palestinian leaders began laying the foundations of a new type of struggle: revolutionary armed struggle and founded the Organization for Holy Jihad (Munathamat al-Jihad al-Muqadas).
In May, they announced the beginning of the Great Palestinian Revolt.
Al-Husseini, as one of the commanders of the Army of the Holy Jihad, led his troops in acts of resistance against both British and zionist occupiers during the Great Revolt between 1933-1936.
(Photo sourced: Resistance News Network)
In October 1936, he was arrested after he was wounded during the Battle of Al-Khader but managed to flee from the hospital to Damascus.
His leadership extended beyond military operations in Palestine, as he also worked tirelessly to mobilize support for the Palestinian cause abroad and participated in the Iraqi struggle for liberation against the British, where he was arrested until 1943.
He remained in exile, passing through Germany where he learned to make explosives and mines and Cairo, setting up training camps and importing weapons, and finally returning to his homeland in 1947 when the partition plan was announced.
(Photo sourced: Resistance News Network)
Upon his return he instantly began orchestrating and taking part in armed actions against zionist expansion.
In April 1948, Al-Husseini left for Damascus to meet with the Military Committee of the League of Arab States in order to ask for arms to repel the zionist incursion into Al-Quds, but the League failed him and the people of Palestine.
(Photo sourced: Resistance News Network)
It was at that time he received news of the occupation of Al-Qastal, a strategically located village west of Al-Quds. Before he left, Al-Husseini wrote a letter to the League in which he says, “I hold you accountable after you left my soldiers at the heights of the victories without aid or weapons”.
He returned one last time to fight, waging a fierce battle against the incursion into Al-Quds and proclaimed, “I am going to al-Qastal, and I will storm it and occupy it, even if that leads to my death.”
(Photo sourced: Resistance News Network)
“By God, I am tired of life and death has become dearer to me than this treatment that the League has dealt us. I am now wishing for death before I see the Jews occupying Palestine. The men of the league and the leadership are betraying Palestine.”
When the news spread that he planned to liberate Al-Qastal, fighters across Palestine came to his aid, liberating the village and raising the Palestinian flag later that afternoon on April 8, 1948. Fighters would later find out he was martyred during its liberation.
(Photo sourced: Resistance News Network)
His legacy was carried forward by his wife Wajeeha Al-Husseini who was his partner in struggle, a daughter and three sons, who fought in the ranks of the Palestinian revolution after the Nakba of 1948.
Al-Husseini’s unwavering bravery and tireless efforts to defend our homeland and resist occupation continue to inspire us in our struggle for liberation. His courage and sacrifice remain a guiding light as we persevere steadfastly in the face of the cowardly zionist enemy.
We honor Al-Husseini’s legacy by renewing our commitment to our struggle. We draw strength from his sacrifice and all those who followed in his footsteps. Together, we will continue the struggle until martyrdom or victory.
(Photo sourced: Resistance News Network)
Glory to the eternal Martyr Abdelqader Al-Husseini.
Diarmuid Breatnach – Talk given at 1916 Performing Arts Club, May 2024.
(Reading time: 6 mins.)
There was a time when from Dublin to Galway, from Kerry to Donegal, the dominant language was Irish. There was a time too when it was widespread in Scotland, in parts of Wales and the main language on the Isle of Man.
Now however one can travel through all of those places and not hear it.
Irish was the first vernacular language to be written down in Europe and though island people, its speakers were not “insular”. The educated spoke Greek and Latin too and when the Dark Ages fell upon Europe it was the Irish intellectuals, the monks who revived and spread literacy there.
But here we are, you and I, speaking English – which did not even exist until at least the 12th Century.
She (I say ‘she’ because language in Irish is a feminine noun and in many other languages too) – she is all around us in place names, though we may know them only through their corrupted forms into English.
Árd/ Ard, a height; Baile/ Bally, a town or village; Béal/ Bel, the mouth of; Bun, the bottom of; Carraig/ Carrig, a rock; Cnoc/ Knock, a hill; Cluain/ Clon, a meadow; Dún/ Dun, a fort or castle; Inis/ Inis or Ennis, an island or a raised mound surrounded by flat land; Loch/ a lake …
The English-language names of twenty-nine of our counties are corruptions of words in Irish: from Ciarraí to Dún na nGall, from Átha Cliath Duibhlinne to Gaillimh. This includes all six counties in the colony: Aontroim, Árd Mhacha, Doire Cholmcille, An Dún, Tír Eoghain, Fear Manach.
Just over half the States of Stáit Aontaithe Meiriceá on Turtle Island have names in the indigenous native languages, so we’re doing well with placenames and also of course have survived the colonial genocidal campaigns and wars much better.
By the way we also have Irish names for some places in Britain: Glaschú, Dún Éidin, Manchuin, Leabharpholl, Brom agus Lúndain. In fact probably none of the names of those cities are originally English anyway.
Irish has left only a small imprint on the general English language for example with “a pair of brogues, whiskey and slogan” (from slua-ghairm, a call to or by a multitude), banshee, carn and smithereeens. And shebeen, in parts of the USA, the Caribbean and in South Africa.
But its influence on the way we speak English in Ireland is clear.
We might say, instead of complaining that we are thirsty, that we have a thirst on us – a direct translation from Tá tart orainn. Or that the humour is on us – Tá fonn orainn. We might “have a head on us”, as in a headache. “The day that’s in it” – an lá atá ann.
We pronounce “film” with a vowel between the L and the M, as it would be in Irish – take the name for a dove and also a personal male name, Colm. We get that with R and M and R and N too, in some areas “a carun of stones” or “down at the farrum”.
We often indicate the absence of ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ in Irish by replying in English to the verb in the question: ‘Will you be there?’ ‘I will surely’ (Beidh, cinnte). ‘Will you do it?’ ‘I will not’ (Ní dhéanfad).
We have an extra tense in Irish, the very recent past tense, which we translate into English as spoken in Ireland: ‘I’m just after cleaning that floor!’ Táim díreach thréis an urlár sin a ghlanadh!
Renaissance of language and culture has often preceded periods of heightened national struggle: the Harp Festival of 1792 was followed soon by the uprising of the United Irish; the cultural work of The Nation newspaper was followed by the rising of the Young Irelanders.
The Nation newspaper of the Young Irelanders sought to create and encourage a nationalist republican culture and was followed by an unsuccessful rising in 1848, during the Great Hunger. (Source image: Internet)
LANGUAGE AND NATIONAL STRUGGLE
The Fenians too had their cultural precursors and the great revivals of the Irish language, Irish sport, speaking and writing in Irish and Irish theatre were not long in finding expression of another kind in the 1916 Rising and the War of Independence.
And campaigns of civil disobedience in the 1960s secured for us Irish-language broadcasting in Radió na Gaeltachta and TG4. Not to mention motor insurance documentation in Irish which Deasún Breatnach won only after going to jail for refusing to display the documentation in English.
Though we can hear the influence of the indigenous language upon our speaking Sacs-Bhéarla, or English, the Irish language itself at this point is in retreat. In fact some might say that it’s in a rout.
Yes, the Gaelscoil movement is broader and deeper than ever before but outside the schools? The Gaeltacht areas are receding, receding … and where can the language be heard outside of those?
Though the Great Hunger caused the most impressive loss of Irish-speaking modern Ireland on the map, the percentage lost during the period of the Irish State is greater. (Image source: Internet)
I had an experience recently that illustrates the problem. In a pub with some friends, I observed a man wearing a silver fáinne, the ring that many people wore to show a proficiency in Irish. It identified the wearer to other Irish-language speakers (my father wore a gold one).
The man had overheard me bidding farewell to friends in Irish and asked me: “Are you an Irishman?” I thought the question strange and said so. Then he asked me was I an Irish speaker, to which I replied in Irish language.
Eventually he came over and said that he didn’t speak Irish himself.
The fáinne was a family heirloom and he had been wearing it, he said, for six months in Dublin, wanting to come across an Irish speaker to whom he would give the ring. Since I had been somewhat abrupt with him, he gave the ring to one in the company who can speak Irish.
Badge inviting people to speak Irish to the wearer (Image sourced: Internet)
LABHAIR Í
Six months in Dublin without hearing Irish spoken or recognition of the fáinne! That illustrates one aspect of the linguistic problem in Ireland. But it is one that we can resolve, fairly easily too. And that brings me to the kernel, the poinnte or point of this talk here today.
I am asking you to speak a cúpla focal, regularly, go rialta, so that she may be heard. Labhair í ionnas go gcloisfear í. Imagine if everywhere in Dublin, on every side, one heard just a few words in Irish – imagine the social and psychological effect over time!
Those who know some Irish would speak her more often. Many who don’t, would feel it worthwhile to learn at least some phrases and some responses. Some might take it further and learn Irish well. Public services might regularly facilitate services through Irish.
Dia dhuit. Dia’s Muire dhuit. Or the non-religious form: Sé do bheatha. Go mba hé duit.
Má sé do thoill é or le do thoill.
Go raibh maith agat in many situations, including to the driver of the bus.
Tá fáilte romhat.
Gabh mo leithscéil.
Would you like a bag? Ní bheidh, go raibh maith agat.
Cash or card? Íoch le cárta, le do thoill as you wave your bank card. Or Airgead thirm, as you take out your wallet or purse.
Go léir, as you indicate that you wish to pay the full amount.
Isteach, le do thoill, when returning a book to the library. Amach, le do thoill, when borrowing one.
Slán, as you leave.
Easy enough, yes? Yes? But though a part of the mind is willing, another part is afraid.
“What if I get a big load of Irish in response and not even understand it? Won’t I look like a right eejit!” Well, there are risks in anything worth doing as was demonstrated in a short play here some time back when two fellas were debating whether and when to chat up a certain woman.
She was not uninterested but they took so long about it she walked out and left them, like fish brought up by fishing line, gasping on the dry quay.
So you could prepare a small survival kit: “Gabh mo leithscéil. I only have a few words/ níl agam ach cúpla focal.”
“Níl agam ach beagán ach tá mé ag iarraidh í a úsáid/ I only have a little but I want to use it. Is foghlaimeor mé/ I am a learner.”
I am not asking for any of us to campaign, to agitate for services to be provided through Irish though that is certainly a linguistic civil right and, as far as state or semi-state services go, a constitutional one.
I am only asking that you contribute to the audibility of the language, to use a few standard greetings and responses and to use them not only to people you know to be Irish speakers, not only to friends and relations … but everywhere in public.
Everywhere
in public.
Go ye out among the people and spread the word – or rather the few words. Scapaigí an cúpla focal.
rebelbreeze 