Statement by the Communist Party of Ireland on the Irish Presidential Election.

The Communist Party of Ireland recognises that the office of Uachtarán na hÉireann is largely symbolic. Incumbents, such as President Higgins, have used the office to raise issues of concern to the people of Ireland, such as homelessness, the genocide in Gaza, the erosion of Irish neutrality and promotion of the Irish language.

They are, however, precluded from taking any independent political action by Article 13.11 of the Constitution which states that,“No power or function conferred on the President by law shall be exercisable or performable by him save only on the advice of the Government.” Recognising the limits of the office, we believe that the present election is important because there is a clear demarcation between the two candidates representing the government parties and Catherine Connolly who is supported by an ad hoc broad left and republican front.

The government candidates, in particular Jim Gavin the Fianna Fáil candidate, are seeking to use the Presidential election as an unofficial referendum on Irish neutrality. Gavin, who has no history of political involvement opened his election campaign by calling for the abolition of the triple lock on the deployment of Irish Defence Forces abroad. Echoing his handler, Taoiseach Micheál Martin, Gavin has called for the bypassing of the UN Security Council when deploying Irish troops abroad, instead relying on decisions made by NATO or the EU. Neither Fianna Fáil nor Fine Gael campaigned on the removal of the Triple Lock in the last General Election.

They have repeatedly refused to give the people a vote on the issue. The Taoiseach is determined to abolish the Triple Lock and the danger is that in the event of a victory for Gavin in the Presidential Election, he will try to claim that as support for the abolition of the Triple Lock.

Abolishing the Triple Lock will mean further erosion of neutrality and closer links with NATO. It will mean diverting billions of euros from health, housing, education and social services into the coffers of US, European and British arms companies.

It will mean turning Ireland into a target in any future wars launched by the NATO/EU Bloc. It will mean our sons and daughters slaughtering and dying to enforce US/EU/British control over resources in Africa, Asia and South America. It will mean abandoning the anti-colonial, progressive and internationalist ideals of Ireland’s long, and unfinished struggle for National Independence and joining with the oppressors.

The Communist Party of Ireland supports Catherine Connolly’s campaign for the office of Uachtarán na hÉireann. She is the only candidate supporting the retention of the Triple Lock. She is the only candidate who opposes the Genocide in Gaza and calls for action not words. She articulates a vision of Ireland in which the needs of society come before the interests of the wealthy.

We call on all those who wish for a sovereign, re-united, neutral and socialist Ireland to campaign for Catherine Connolly in your workplaces, in your schools and colleges, in your communities, your unions and your sporting and cultural organisations.

TURN THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION INTO A REFERENDUM ON NEUTRALITY AND PEACE.

VOTE CONNOLLY NO. 1

That applies to Zelensky too. Also to most states supported by NATO, or the portrayal of those antagonized by NATO. It’s almost as if it’s a worthless definition.

Have any cool sources on this new equipment? Sounds promising.

In reality, he would need to pivot the economy away from America and to China

I strongly disagree, I believe they should pivot towards autarky and self-reliance. The UK is a central country in the imperialist system, they don’t need to replace one dependence with another (and China has no need for the UK specifically), and a lot of their integration with the US is already just parasitic rentier finance capital.

I also don’t see any reason for enabling a national bourgeoisie in the Mao Zedong Thought sense in a central country, as that applies specifically to dependent/colonial nations on the periphery. The UK does not need a national liberation revolution, and any strong enough national bourgeoisie would naturally metastasize beyond their national borders as they did in the past.

It’s hard to say what the correct path for a central nation towards revolution would be, since they all failed. But abandoning the imperialist system (economically and militarily) in favour of self-sufficiency and solidarity is, at the very least, useful for both their local working class and revolutionary movements abroad. It also signals the mounting strength of the opposition to NATO and neoliberalism movements in Europe.

Effectively present the corbynista programme without having to deal with internal Labour sabotage. Key points are against genocide in Gaza, backing out of Ukraine and maybe even NATO, investing into rebuilding the NHS and supporting poor working people in the UK and immigrants.

Main problem is how they hope to achieve this under electoralism, but at least Corbyn isn’t allergic to rallies and agitation.

ITT: people confusing remarks by a parlamentarian as official statements by the Ministry of Defense or the head of the executive.

The red line about deep strikes has been around ever since the beginning of the war, with only minor adjustment of nuclear policy since the Storm Shadow/ATACMS deployment back in November last year. Instead of nuclear war all we got was the live test of the Oreshnik.

The current Russian leadership is cautious to a fault when it comes to nuclear escalation. A single parlamentarian is not going to change that, and the headline is misleading. Instead of being smug about it for the 100th time since the beginning of the war, pray that the UA army doesn’t get their hands on a dirty bomb.

Seems they’re testing the waters on all sorts of leftist positions, from lowering the work week to fighting for “sovereignty”. It is partially electoral bluster, but may eventually lead to what the left actually is asking for, breaking diplomatic relations with Israel like Colombia.

I live and breath the revolutionary catechism, which might be a good read to understand your own feelings through something of a complete opposite of how you feel.

But it’s also important that there exist ordinary, self-preserving people. Those are the ones the revolutionaries seek to protect and draw their passion from. The same way you think of your mother in case you die, she might feel similar to you. To each person who is still socially connected there are other people who matter. And those, either in concrete relations (like somebody’s child) or abstract social understanding (the set of all children in a community) are what usually leads people to be willing to die.

Another important point is to consider how dire the situations are for the revolutionaries you mentioned. Imagine a genocidal imperialist country is invading your homeland, knowing full well that survival would mean slavery, exploitation, torture and all that happened in, for example, the Japanese invasion of China. In those conditions choosing death may not only seem preferable, but also just accelerating the same outcome in case of defeat.

All men must die, but death can vary in its significance. The ancient Chinese writer Szuma Chien said, “Though death befalls all men alike, it may be weightier than Mount Tai or lighter than a feather.” To die for the people is weightier than Mount Tai, but to work for the fascists and die for the exploiters and oppressors is lighter than a feather. Comrade Chang Szu-teh died for the people, and his death is indeed weightier than Mount Tai.

Here.

Jokes aside, CPop does exist and could be studied comparatively. I have no idea if it’s actually any better there, but could be an interesting topic for Marxists who like that style of music, in both its merits and deficiencies.

Honestly found this post rather tame. I’ve heard many horror stories from friends who are into K-Pop about how mistreated the artists are, specially the ones that don’t get successful and flop. Stuff like getting into horrible debt, being stuck to label but unable to record or sing anymore, and having to right to one’s own life.

It always seemed like the terrible state of the US pop music entertainment industry we always knew was horrible (even Nickelodeon did a parody of it with Big Time Rush), but on steroids.

Sadly, I never got interested enough to thoroughly understand and critique it, but what you’re describing is too tame even for the US pop industry that churned out Hannah Montana and Ariana Grande through years of child abuse. It’s actually much much worse than that.