Latest News & Updates

Rebuilding the Republican Movement

04/07/07

In the article below éirígí chairperson Brian Leeson explores what shape a resurgent Irish Republican Movement might take.

It is now more then eighty-six years since the partitioning of Ireland and the creation of the twenty-six and six county states. Only those who have been fortunate enough to live well into their nineties now remember an Ireland without partition, albeit under British rule. Soon, within a decade, only a handful will have shared the Ireland of Clarke, Pearse, and Connolly.

This fast diminishing pool of older citizens represent a living organic link to a time when republicanism enjoyed its highest ever levels of popular support; to a time also when British rule in Ireland, all of Ireland, was seriously challenged and very nearly defeated. The challenge facing republicans now, in 2007, is to re-build a republican movement which will once again challenge British rule in Ireland, preferably before the organic link to that most glorious period of Irish history is forever broken.

If republicans are to succeed in this endeavour we would do well to identify why, after more than eight decades, republicanism has failed to complete the ‘unfinished business’ of 1916 and how, after a thirty year insurrection, the British have been able to effectively pacify the six counties with a limited form of home rule.

The answer, or at least a part of the answer, to these questions may lie in the very type, or model, of ‘movement’ that republicans have repeatedly tried to build since 1921.

Republicans have, understandably, sought inspiration from the 1916-1921 period when a ‘republican movement’, largely, but not exclusively, consisting of a political party in the form of Sinn Féin and an army in the form of the Irish Republican Army, brought about the partial withdrawal of British forces in Ireland.

Over the course of the last forty years there have been at least half-a-dozen separate ‘movements’, all based, to a greater or lesser extent, upon the traditional ‘party/army’ model, none of which have been able to achieve anything approaching the levels of effectiveness or popular support enjoyed by republicanism during the period of the Tan War. To recognise this reality is not to besmirch or denigrate those genuine republicans within any of these ‘movements’.

The question now for all republicans is ‘Does the traditional ‘party/army’ model of republican ‘movement’ best serve our collective struggle now and in the coming years or do we need to develop an alternative, new, model upon which to build opposition to the British occupation?’

Before attempting to tease out the potential shape of a twenty-first century republican movement there may be value in examining what exactly a ‘movement’ actually is.

The most common definitions of what constitutes a political or social movement refer to organisations and individuals who, with a shared ideology, work together towards a shared objective(s).

Over the course of the last century there have been countless such ‘multi-organisational’ movements which fit within this broad definition. The so-called ‘global justice movement’, the feminist movement, the civil rights movements in both Ireland and the United States, the gay rights movement, the green or environmental movement are but a few examples.

There are a number of features common to all of these movements which are worth noting.

Firstly, it is impossible to specify a start or finish date for any of these movements; one cannot say that on day X the environmental movement started or that on day Y the civil rights movement ended.

Secondly, membership of these movements is not regulated or formalised in any way. It is therefore not possible to formally join, or be expelled from, such a movement, although it is, of course, possible to join, or be expelled from, an organisation within such a movement. Instead individuals and organisations are part of a given movement simply by their contribution and activism towards the shared objective(s). Equally those who choose to abandon those same objective(s) exclude themselves from the movement.

Thirdly, the individual organisations within a given movement maintain their own organisational individuality and integrity and are not answerable to a central executive or ‘leadership’ of the overall movement. The absence of a centralised ‘leadership’ does not prevent some or all of the organisations within a movement from working together, on occasion closely, on occasion more loosely.

The first point above is hugely significant for those republicans who are currently inactive or non-aligned, who are perhaps adopting a ‘wait and see’ approach to their own contribution to struggle. There will be no official start date for a ‘new’ republican movement. There will be no dramatic press conference announcing that the struggle is to be re-commenced at nine o’ clock on Monday morning. The struggle for Irish freedom is here and it is now.

With regard to the second and third points above it is clear that there is significant difference between the models adopted by other social and political movements and the traditional ‘party/army’ model adopted by Irish republicans.

Amorphous, multi-organisational movements, while being far from perfect, have a number of advantages over singular or dual-organisational movements. Where a single organisation, and by extension a single leadership, encapsulate the entirety of a movement there are inherent dangers that that same leadership may become compromised or out-manoeuvred by their opponents. In such a scenario the entirety of the movement and their wider struggle can be effectively neutralised. Republicans do not have to look too far into their history to find examples of this phenomenon.

Multi-organisational movements do not suffer from this ‘all the eggs in the one basket’ scenario. Where one or indeed several organisations are neutralised there are other organisations already in position ready to fill the subsequent vacuum.

Another major advantage of the multi-organisational model is that it allows various individuals and organisations to focus on aspects of the struggle that are of particular interest to them. In the Irish context this means that those who have a particular interest, for example, in the Irish language, can work and specialise in this sector of struggle, knowing that they are part of a broader republican movement. The same would apply for those involved in sectors such as the organised labour movement or indeed in traditional political parties. It is this very diversity of such a movement, based in hundreds or preferably thousands of separate but inter-related sites, that gives it its’ real strength. At certain points all of these separate sites can be pulled together to exercise that strength.

Movements of this type have a proven record of effecting change. In recent years a number of examples in Latin and South America have shown the potential for such movements to effect real, in-depth social and political change. The two most obvious examples being those of Venezuela and Bolivia where broad multi-organisational movements have succeeded in electing radicals to the highest office of state. Neither Hugo Chavez nor Evo Morales have come to power through the actions of a singular, vanguard party, but instead have done so by winning the support of a multitude of organisations united by their desire to see the introduction of a more equitable socio-economic system within their respective countries.

éirígí believes that Ireland does not need a ‘new’ republican movement because one already exists. Those individuals and organisations who refuse to accept the British presence in Ireland, and who are willing to actively undermine it are the de facto republican movement. It is, therefore, not a new movement that is required, but a resurgent one.

éirígí is convinced that the type of republican movement that Ireland needs in the twenty-first century will be far more complex and amorphous than the traditional ‘party/army’ one. That is because the nature of the British occupation itself is complex, amorphous and changing.

Britain’s role in Ireland extends far beyond the political or constitutional spheres. It is through its influence on the social, economic and cultural aspects of life in Ireland, in addition to the political, that it sustains the occupation. It follows, therefore, that any effort to remove Britain from Ireland must be organised not only on the political front but also on the social, cultural and economic. Any resurgent republican movement must seek to include not only the traditional ‘Republican’ organisations but also other progressive’s who have not traditionally been seen as part of the republican movement.

Not only are there many inherent advantages to such a multi-organisational republican movement, it is also the only viable model at this time.

There are currently at least a dozen separate republican organisations in Ireland. These organisations are variously constituted as political parties, movements, coalitions etc. Each exists for its own legitimate political and historical reasons which are unlikely to be overcome in the short or medium term although this does not rule out the possibility of some organisational mergers at some point in the future.

Issues and initiatives which allow for closer co-operation between some or all of these groups already exist and more will emerge over the coming years and this is to be welcomed, although it alone will not significantly increase the strength of republicanism.

It is by growing each of the individual organisations, in terms of membership and popular support, that the overall strength of the republican movement will be increased. It is therefore the responsibility of each organisation to build its own base while maintaining and developing friendly and mutually beneficial links with other republican organisations.

But as importantly, for the republican movement of the twenty-first century, will be the inclusion of progressive trade unions, language and cultural groups, community and women’s groups among others in a multi-organisational mass, social, political and cultural movement for the twin and interrelated objectives of Irish freedom and social justice.