This is a part of a series of articles.
Read the intro here,
part I here,
part II here,
part III here and
part IV here
and part V here
From the early days of Militant in Ireland (the group that in time became Militant Labour and then the Socialist Party) we proudly asserted that we could republish any of our articles and continue to stand over it. We took great care with all written material, with an editorial process of discussion, checking and rechecking. This applied to important statements and major articles of course, but also to other material including leaflets and posters. Mistakes were made, but not often, and when they were they were then corrected. Such mistakes were generally minor. It remains the case that there is no significant article published prior to 2010 that we cannot stand over today. There is a clear line of continuity from our first publications in 1968-1969.
The Socialist Party (SP) claims the inheritance of Militant in its early days, and the patient work over the following decades. This claim no longer stands up. Political continuity has been broken. This loss of continuity is now visible in the writings and the practice of the SP.
In this article we critique two statements from the SP which together illustrate a clear truth: it is not possible to straddle the worlds of identity politics and Marxism indefinitely. In a clash of fundamentally different ideas there is no such thing as a draw. One side or the other is victorious in the end. That doesn’t mean that all trace of Marxism is gone, but the sprinkling of a few words of socialism here and there do not hide the loss of a class analysis. Without a class analysis it is inevitable that the Party will lose its way, and this process has already begun.
ROSA on PRIDE and the Gaza War
ROSA, the socialist feminist formation established and sustained by the SP posted a statement as a Facebook post on July 25th 2025[1] which illustrates the politics of the Party today. The post takes the form of call to arms before the following day’s Belfast Pride parade: “With Belfast Pride scheduled to take place tomorrow, we feel an obligation to recognise and note that this is the second year in which the biggest Pride event in the North will be taking place amid the backdrop of unimaginable horror and genocide in Gaza”.
In 652 words (produced in its entirety in the footnote) this statement makes a series of profound political mistakes which illustrate the extent to which “identity politics” now hold sway over the politics of the SP.
The opening sentence references “the North”. We have always been very careful in our use of language in Ireland because of the sensitivities around the national question. The term “the North” or the “North of Ireland” is widely used by Catholics but rarely by Protestants. Using the term is a signifier that the writer (and the publisher) is of the Catholic community. The descriptor “Northern Ireland” has never been neutral, but it is the closest that exists to a neutral term when in the past many in the Protestant community would use the terms “Ulster” or “the province” and each were almost never used by Catholics. “Northern Ireland” is now less neutral than before, but it is widely used by many of those workers and young people who reject sectarianism and division. In recent years we have tended to use “the North” and “Northern Ireland” interchangeably in articles and statements. The single use of the “the North” in this statement is part of a clear trend. Over dozens of articles the precise and careful use of language that typified our approach has slipped. There are multiple examples and whilst all balance has not been lost-some articles are more careful-the trajectory is clear. It speaks to a slippage away from a balanced class approach and a robust anti-sectarianism.
In the intense and difficult political atmosphere of Northern Ireland one unbalanced article is potentially highly problematic. We have always explained to comrades that even one article, if it is profoundly unbalanced, could tip the Party into one or other sectarian camp in the eyes of workers and young people, and it is extreme in its articulation of a problem, there is no way back. It is more likely that further material will correct an imbalance, but only if the imbalance is recognised and openly addressed.
Unfortunately, this article is but one of many which reveal a clear trend. There is an increasing tendency to ignore the concerns of Protestants and little attempt to understand Protestant working class consciousness. Across a dozen articles on Israel-Palestine and the war in Gaza, this has been evident: there is no acknowledgement that the views of Protestant working class people are often more sympathetic to Israel than the Catholic working class. Acknowledging this, and addressing it, is crucial to gaining an echo from Protestant workers, including Protestant trade union activists.
In paragraph two we see the first mention of “Israel”: “Starvation has been weaponized in the Gaza Strip by Israel, and so too is aid”. Israel is mentioned three more times in the statement, but not once the “Israeli government”, “Israeli state” or “Israeli ruling-class”. Indeed, the word “class” is not used once in the post, and specifically the “working class” make no appearance. The use of the term “Israel” in a lengthy and important statement, without any qualification, ignores class divisions and potential class divisions in the state of Isreal.
The Palestinian people are also referred to as an undifferentiated mass, but in this case one of goodness: “But those of us who have been moved to action and who have refused to allow life to grind on as normal, without pause, questioning, disruption and fight-back in the face of genocide-we have also found hope in the outpouring of solidarity and shared grief. We have drawn inspiration and strength from the Palestinian people who, in most inhumane conditions, have found continuous ways to show their humanity and love and dignity.”
There is no mention of Hamas, or its reactionary politics. No reference to the gangsters who hijack food supplies or the those who ally with the IDF. No mention of the Palestinian Authority or the (admittedly weak and under-developed) Palestinian bourgeois. The thrust of the statement then seeks to equate the Palestinian people with another undifferentiated mass-of trans and queer people.
“Therefore, our methods of fightback and struggle must always be unapologetically rooted in the understanding that our fight is against a sick, genocidal, queerphobic, racist and misogynist capitalist system. We will go tomorrow in the hopes of channelling the anger and desire for a different type of world so many of us feel, and we will be vocal in our belief that there is an urgent need to build an international socialist feminist movementand tear down this sick system. For every person has been lost as a result of this suffocatingly unequal and oppressive system, and for the future generations-so that they may live in a radically different world, free from such injustice “
Again, there is simply no attempt at class differentiation or class analysis. Nor any mention of the working-class. This is the logic of identity politics, and of post-colonial theory. The Palestinians are oppressed; Israel is the oppressor. The argument is that socialists should stand with the oppressed and link all struggles of the oppressed. This is of course true but is an unfinished analysis, and without class content has little real meaning. To emphasis this latter point, the statement ends with the slogan “Always and forever, Free Palestine”. This slogan is long on emotion, but low on content. It speaks of an unclear analysis, a lack of understanding, and confused ideas.
Language Rights
That the balance necessary to maintain an independent class-based position is in the process of being lost is very clearly illustrated by an article on the Irish language published in May 2025[2]. This article, which addresses specifically a row over dual language signage at the new railway station in Belfast, impatiently hectors and patronises anyone with questions about the roll out of Irish language rights in the North.[3] Even the unqualified title-“Irish-language signage – an important step forward” is problematic. In one sense it is a step forward, but the nuances around the use of language should be reflected in the title, as otherwise it simply takes a side in a battle in which Marxists should be pointing to a third, independent, class-based position.
The SP now must find a minority community or group around which to cohere. In this article the rights of the “Irish language community” is invoked three times:
“No means exists by which the diverse Irish-speaking community can be consulted on matters such as Irish language signage at Grand Central or any matter relating to the future of the language”.
“ It is always politics from above regarding Irish speakers, but without their real involvement. As a minority group, this should not be the case”.
“It is absolutely key that the Irish-speaking community in its full diversity be consulted and given a meaningful voice in securing the Irish language’s rights and future”.
In contrast there is no mention of the Protestant community, or the Protestant working-class. Protestants are broadly speaking uneasy about recent developments regarding the use of Irish in public places but are not entirely opposed to such changes. The reality is that the majority of Protestants neither embrace or reject change. But neutrality or indifference, or even uneasy acceptance, is not permissible for todays SP. The genuine concerns and questions of working-class people are dismissed airily in an attack on more extreme sectarian elements:
“Those trying to stir up opposition are beating the sectarian drum in an attempt to fear-monger and demonise the Irish language to distract from their failings and further their cynical agenda”
“In Queen’s University (QUB), the Ulster Young Unionists, a student society associated with the Ulster Unionist Party, have opposed a campaign for Irish language signage with spurious claims that this would add to concerns about QUB being made a “cold house” for unionists.”.
Counter-posed to those who are opposed or uncertain are those from a Protestant background who are embracing the Irish language:
“This ignores the growing interest in the Irish language, including amongst those from Protestant backgrounds.”
“This means challenging the narrative pushed by different Unionist forces that the Irish language belongs only to Catholics or that it represents an attack on Protestants. History, in fact, demonstrates the fallacy of this argument; the 1911 census returns indicate that at the time there were as many Irish speakers on Belfast’s Shankill Road as there were on the Falls Road.”
“The recent rise in interest in the Irish language in predominantly Protestant areas shows that this sectarian line of argument can be, and is being, undermined. The Turas project in East Belfast for example, who strongly argue that the Irish language belongs to everyone, has found their adult classes massively oversubscribed”.
The article thus manages to praise Protestants who have embraced the Irish language, whilst accusing those who object of “attacking” Protestants and being “sectarian”. denigrating and demonising those who object. The extreme voices who are absolutely opposed to the realisation of Irish language rights are sectarian and anti-working class of course, but the inverted logic of the SP explains nothing.
The approach of the SP in this article is little different from the reactionary position taken by a previous generation of unionist leaders who argued that Catholics could be encouraged to act like Protestants with the right enticements. Captain Terence O’Neill, the Northern Ireland Prime Minister and Unionist Party leader in 1969, stated: “It is frightfully hard to explain to Protestants that if you give Roman Catholics a good job and a good house. they will live like Protestants…..” [4]
O’Neill was arguing that Catholics could become like Protestants with the right inducements. In effect the SP are saying that today some Protestants have been won away from their sectarianism through an embrace of Irish. They have joined the chorus of those who lecture Protestants, “explaining” that the Irish language is their language too, if only they would accept it. Their concerns are dismissed as meaningless and without foundation-as “spurious”. Protestants can “live like Catholics” through the embrace of Irish language and culture.
“The Troubles by other means”
There is no trace of our long-standing positions on the national question in either of these two statements. The SP has forgotten our fundamental analysis. As we have explained often the so-called “peace process” is in an important sense the Troubles “by other means”. Rather than the open conflict of the years of violence there has been a long, drawn-out war of attrition over territory. This war of attrition takes many forms-disputes over housing, parades, the display of flags and the painting of murals-and over language rights.
The marking of territory as either Catholic or Protestant is an important feature of this process. In Protestant working-class areas this is often achieved with an aggressive display of flags and other emblems. Sinn Fein, as always look both ways at once. They too wish to mark territory, as Catholic and nationalist, but are careful to avoid taking steps which undermine their claim to be responsible, and hence suitable for government. Hence the erection by Sinn Fein of “Go Slow” (“Go Mall” in Irish) signs outside schools in Catholic areas in recent.[5]
Divisions around the national question often take the form of clashes on what might seem to be secondary issues. It is the duty of socialists to engage with the very real problems thrown up by the national question every day and to put forward concrete positions and proposals on issues which are essentially connected to the identity and aspirations of each community. If the aspiration of one community is met in full the other community may conceive this as a loss of its identity or a blow to its aspirations. Each becomes a microcosm of the overall conflict.
It is important that we oppose both the denial of rights, but also the promotion of rights in a way which is one sided and is designed to increase division. Examples of issues in which there are rights on both sides are contentious parades, the flying of flags in public places, and the use of language. In the 1990s the Socialist Party pioneered an approach on the issue of contentious parades which focused on recognising the rights of each community, but also on the over-arching right of the working class as a whole not to be dragged into conflict. At the height of the conflict around the Drumcree parade in the mid-1990s our voice was isolated. Nevertheless, we took our arguments to the eye of the storm, speaking to groups on the Garvaghy Road in Portadown and the Bogside in Derry. Over time the approach we advocated became widely accepted. Our position on the many other secondary issues is to take a similar approach. We recognise that each community has rights but so too does the working class as a whole. Every issue must be approached from this standpoint.
The rights that ought to be accorded to Irish language has become a sharply contentious issue in the recent period. Catholics in the North have always had a strong affinity with the Irish language. For most this went no further than a nostalgic attachment, though a minority have sought to create new Gaeltacht (Irish speaking) areas, and in particular to establish Irish language schools. Most Catholics have been supportive of these efforts.
The rights of Irish language speakers in the recent period have come much more to the fore as Sinn Fein has consciously propelled it to the centre of its “rights” agenda. Sinn Fein’s increasingly strident approach has gained support in the Catholic community partly because of the reaction of unionist politicians such as Gregory Campbell.[6] Campbell’s derogatory and sectarian comments remind Catholics of their second-class status under 50 years of Unionist Party rule, and centuries of oppression under British imperialism, including the repression of the Irish language.
Historically most Protestants did not identify strongly with the Irish language, but nor did they oppose its protection and, in certain circumstances, its promotion. Now however, the way in which the issue has been amplified by Sinn Fein, and some language activists has caused widespread concern. They fear steps which “hollow out British culture”.
Under socialism all languages would be protected and promoted. Languages are the cultural inheritance of all of humanity, to be valued and celebrated. Everyone has the right to speak and use whatever language they choose in their daily lives. We uphold this right in all circumstances. This specifically applies to Irish and Ulster-Scots in the context of Northern Ireland. We support the right of Irish speakers to use Irish, and we support an approach which extends the circumstances in which this is possible rapidly. The state has a duty to extend this right-through the provision of translation services, for example. This also applies to Ulster-Scots. We do not support any measure which diminishes the rights of others.
The Influence of “Identity Politics”
The SP have moved away from this class-based approach, away from the ideas of Marxism and towards the adoption of a method and approach based on identity politics (IP), and the concept of “intersectionality”. [7] That this is so these two statements illustrate comprehensively.
Since the 1960s the idea that identities, and interacting identities, were more important than class, gained traction. The development of these ideas is directly related to the defeats of working-class movements. Defeats can lead to disillusionment and despair and in such contexts “new” and “alternative” ideas come to the fore. Such developments have occurred many times in the history of the workers movement.
As is often the case such ideas are first put forward to correct alleged deficits in Marxism, which, it is argued, fails to account for all the features of society and to sufficiently address the needs of oppressed groups. Thus, many of the first proponents of what became identity politics argued that their ideas emerged from or complemented Marxism. Now however, many of the most robust proponents of IP are open in their rejection of Marxism. Some go further and argue that Marxism enables oppression.
IP correctly point to the character of special forms of oppression that different layers of society face, but fail to point a way forward. Essentially, they isolate the struggle of the various oppressed layers from the struggle of the working class and from the struggle to overthrow the rule of capital and establish an alternative, democratic, socialist society.
Identity politics is a form of politics which focuses on group identity rather than on class. Groups can be defined in many ways, for example, by sexual orientation or gender identity. Identity politics focuses on the problems of a specific group: for example, “Black nationalism”, or feminism. As is immediately obvious all forms of identity politics are based on an all-class alliance. If the defining feature of the group is, for example gender, then other differences are of no importance or at best secondary importance. A rich feminist and a poor feminist are united in their feminism. Likewise, a rich Gaeilgeoir (Irish speaker) or a poor Gaeilgeoir
Conclusion: Continuity Broken
Comrades in the Socialist Party may argue that its politics cannot be captured in two short statements alone. They will point to other better, more balanced material. We accept that such material exists, but contend that in a very real way, political groups and parties are defined not just by their best material, but by their worst. A group or party is understood best when it grapples with new problems, or old problems in new guises, and by its ability to adapt and reorientate. And finally, a group or party is defined by its trajectory, and in the case of the SP this is away from Marxism.
In the 1990s we wrestled with new problems arising from the collapse of Stalinism and the retreats of the workers movement, and of the changed political landscape arising from the 30 years of the Troubles. We did not lose our bearings. Key to this was our nuanced understanding of the national question, in Ireland and internationally. In 1997 we agreed a conference document on perspectives for Northern Ireland. The conclusions we drew in a tumultuous period have stood the test of time and we quote from extensively to make the point that Marxist ideas are the guide that sees us through difficult times.
“These are very difficult circumstances for the work of the Socialist Party. The weakening of the Labour movement and rise of sectarianism makes hard going for our ideas. Nonetheless it is possible to make headway, building, in the short term, on the ones and twos who stand out against the sectarian tide.
To do so we must first and foremost develop a clear understanding of what is taking place. Without this the pressures of nationalism, unionism and sectarianism in society will inevitably seep into the Party. Our most immediate task is to provide a class analysis which can steady the Party and its periphery.
We need to identify the fundamental processes and separate these from the surrounding fog of complex and often contradictory developments.” [8]
We pointed to an “upsurge in nationalism over recent years….” and explained that “an assertion of a cultural and national identity made all the more vigorous by the generations of discrimination and suppression of that identity.”
But in recognising the right to cultural expression, and the impact of the denial of such rights, we were clear-eyed in our assessment of nationalism:
“….The cloaking of Catholic working class areas in a blanket of nationalism is deliberately to create a sense of identity which separates them entirely from the Protestant community. It is the national and cultural expression of the ongoing territorial segregation and of the political segregation which at this point is virtually total.
This rise of nationalism is a backward step in the consciousness of the Catholic working class. In the name of “diversity” it promotes the idea of a single pure “Irish” cultural identity to which all should subscribe. It is the same stultifying attitude to culture/religion etc. which characterised the first decades of the Southern Irish state, a manacle of uniformity which the population there are no longer prepared to accept.
We are not opposed to cultural expression but value all cultures equally. In fact we see socialism as the only guarantee that the best aspects of all cultures can be preserved. But our position on one culture as opposed to any other is essentially a negative one. We oppose restrictions on cultural expression as well as discrimination against any nationality or any culture. But in promoting the fullest freedom of cultural expression, we do not promote or endorse one culture over another. The argument that there is one culture which for some historical or other reason is the appropriate culture for Ireland is narrow and false.”[9]
We pointed to the manner in which issues come to represent a sense of being on the under attack “the issue has struck a much broader chord because to a community feeling itself in demographic and territorial decline the objection to marches seemed part of a relentless attack on Protestant rights”-and the need to “separate the genuine concerns of Protestants from the triumphalist aspirations of the sectarians.”[10]
This approach is light years away from the approach of the Socialist Party today. Instead it has ended up in a morass of intersectional identity politics. The July 25th statement by ROSA, the Irish language statement, and many other articles and statements we could point to, illustrate the ways in which it has lost its way. The orientation and method of the SP will increasingly separate it out from the broader class struggle and class organisations. Ultimately this will lead to only disillusionment, and demoralisation. It is incumbent upon us to seek to explain the trajectory of the Socialist Party-why did an organisation based on the ideas of Marxism so fundamentally lose its way over a relatively short period of time-and we will begin this process in the next article.
[1] Facebook post by ROSA dated July 25th, 2025. Published in full below:
“With Belfast Pride scheduled to take place tomorrow, we feel an obligation to recognise and note that this is the second year in which the biggest Pride event in the North will be taking place amid the backdrop of unimaginable horror and genocide in Gaza. Starvation has been weaponized in the Gaza Strip by Israel, and so too is aid. Daily mass murders are being perpetrated by IDF soldiers and foreign international soldiers, particularly from the US, at ‘aid distribution sites’, sites designed to create chaos and dehumanise people in desperate need.
The images and footage emerging from Gaza for over two years are beyond words-may the evidence of these crimes haunt those who said and did nothing forever. The crimes being committed against Palestinians have been happening in plain sight, and as we know, the blame lies not only with Israel-but with every government, media outlet, and international institution which has facilitated this genocide, directly or indirectly, by failing to take any meaningful action to stop it.
Feelings of rage, heartache and despair are something that many of us are carrying and the feeling of helplessness in the face of such relentless brutality of suffering is just. There is no way to have your eyes open to what is happening in Palestine and not have your heart broken on an ongoing basis.
But those of us who have been moved to action and who have refused to allow life to grind on as normal, without pause, questioning, disruption and fight-back in the face of genocide-we have also found hope in the outpouring of solidarity and shared grief. We have drawn inspiration and strength from the Palestinian people who, in most inhumane conditions, have found continuous ways to show their humanity and love and dignity.
Tomorrow, we will march in protests against the attacks on trans lives, queer lives and bodily autonomy globally. We will march against the rise of gender-based violence globally, an epidemic which is disproportionately experienced by Trans women. And we will march in solidarity with Palestine. We march with a commitment to keep fighting for an end to the genocide, an end to occupation and oppression of Palestine. We march to chat loudly and angrily at the rainbow and pink washing of genocide in Palestine, and to renounce the presence of corporations who have profited from and facilitated the genocide in Palestine,
Pride is of radical roots-born from struggle led by black and brown, Trans and Queer individuals who voted against police brutality and their oppression. We must do everything on our part to reclaim those roots and reclaim the essence of Pride. Tomorrow cannot be an empty, hollow expression of celebration. Tomorrow must be a protest-one that is unapologetically political, loud and explicit in our demands.
Today, it is the same systems and prototype figures who the Stonewall Inn patrons were fighting against who are meting out ongoing attacks against the Queer and Trans community internationally, and it is the same forces who are guilty of being complicit in Israel’s genocide in Palestine as well as profiting from it, our struggle against oppression in all its forms is so deeply interconnected as it comes from the same source,
Therefore, our methods of fightback and struggle must always be unapologetically rooted in the understanding that our fight is against a sick, genocidal, queerphobic, racist and misogynist capitalist system. We will go tomorrow in the hopes of channelling the anger and desire for a different type of world so many of us feel, and we will be vocal in our belief that there is an urgent need to build an international socialist feminist movement and tear down this sick system. For every person has been lost as a result of this suffocatingly unequal and oppressive system, and for the future generations-so that they may live in a radically different world, free from such injustice
Always and forever, Free Palestine”.
[2] Irish-language signage – an important step forward. Socialist Party, May 1st, 2025. https://www.socialistpartyni.org/analysis-news/irish-language-signage-an-important-step-forward/
[3] No Irish signage at station for at least six months. BBC News, April 30th, 2025. https://share.google/KeeiOsQjVwYgURiSV
[4] “It is frightfully hard to explain to Protestants that if you give Roman Catholics a good job and a good house. they will live like Protestants because they will see neighbours with cars and television sets; they will refuse to have eighteen children. But if a Roman Catholic is jobless, and lives in the most ghastly hovel, he will rear eighteen children on National Assistance. If you treat Roman Catholics with due consider and kindness, they will live like Protestants in spite of the authoritative nature of their Church …
Captain Terence ONeill, Unionist Party, Northern Ireland Prime Minister, May 1969. Belfast Telegraph, 10 May 1969
[5] No action to be taken over Sinn Féin Irish-language road signs, Stormont department says. Belfast Live, August 23rd, 2022. https://www.belfastlive.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/no-action-taken-over-sinn-24830550#
[6] Curry my yogurt row: Gregory Campbell accused of racism. BBC News, 10th November 2014. https://share.google/TSaNWe70O8Z9WCeXS
[7] Identity Politics – a Marxist Critique Internationalist Standpoint July 12, 2025 https://www.internationaliststandpoint.org/identity-politics-a-marxist-critique/
[8] Socialist Party Conference Document “Northern Perspectives”, 1997. Paragraphs 12-15. https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/hadden/1997/xx/nipersp.html
[9] Socialist Party Conference Document “Northern Perspectives”, 1997. Paragraphs 27-30. https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/hadden/1997/xx/nipersp.html
[10] Socialist Party Conference Document “Northern Perspectives”, 1997. Paragraphs 71-72. https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/writers/hadden/1997/xx/nipersp.html
