Part 5 - LA36 KB articles 1988 98 and cuttings 088 005

1 digital image

5 A peculiarly obnoxious form of argument on this question is to argue from a supposedly 'Marxist-Leninist' point of view that the guerilla warfare waged by the Irish Republican Army consists of the acts of individuals isolated from the masses in the manner of the anarchists, Blanquists and others criticised by Marx. In fact it was Lenin himself who gave the definitive answer to opportunist arguments of this type when he exposed how "incorrect, unscientific and unhistorical is the practice so very common among us of analysing guerilla warfare without reference to the circum- stances of an uprising." He made the pointed comment which still strikes home today that "it is not guerilla actions which disorganise the movement, but the weakness of a party which is incapable of taking such actions under its control... A Marxist bases himself on the class struggle, and not social peace... When I see a Social- Democrat theoretician or publicist ... displaying... a proud smugness and a self-exalted tendency to repeat phrases learned by rote in early youth about anarchism, Blanquism and terrorism, I am hurt by this degradation of the most revolutionary doctrine in the world." Besides these struggles of oppressed nations and national minorities, other mass movements arise in imperialist society. Some, like the peace movement and environmental or 'green' movements, are characteristic of contemporary society. Others, such as the miners' strike in Britain in 1985, are manifestations of the long-term and fundamental contra- dictions of capitalism. However, all of these mass move- ments whether new or traditional gravitate more markedly towards the revolutionary anti-imperialist traditions that have been mentioned the more militant they become. For example, the most politically significant aspect of the miners' strike was the conscious adoption by sections of the miners' youth of the Irish example in their view

full_reference_code