Globalise Resistance statement on Gardai

by Daithi Sat May 11, 2002 18:24

I don't see the problem.

At no point does this letter claim that GR or Nora or indeed anyone is speaking on behalf of Reclaim the Streets. In fact, the point of the letter is that RTS was not about anti-capitalism.

I don't intend to take sides in the ongoing debate about GR v RTS but would whoever posted this letter like to explain what they find objectionable about it?

by lojic Sat May 11, 2002 18:46

Let's see, first coroporate media is confused about the "anti-capitalist" and "anti-globalisation" nature of the party.

Then Jo Carolan (GR/SWP) appoints himself spokesperson. The entire radio show discussion hinges around clarifying that he is not.

Then Globalise Resistance jumps in to call a protest, there are objections to this bandwagon jumping.

Still the corporate media are confused (and no wonder).

So Nora G./Globalise Resistance follows it up with a letter in the Irish Times.

No where does this letter say Reclaim The Streets has NOTHING to do with Globalise Resistance.

If you can't see the subtle misrepresentation in that then you're trying not to.

by Daithi Sat May 11, 2002 18:51

I would blame the mainstream media more; I'm blue in the face trying to explain this sort of stuff to journalists. Also trying to explain that Indymedia isn't "the website of Globalise Resistance" or even RTS can be a little difficult at times.

You're right-if a journalist doesn't know the background to anti-capitalist activities, and is still confused on the difference between Socialist Workers Party, Socialist Party, and Workers Party, they can easily be *fooled*, be it as a result of either innocent or misleading material supplied by one of these previously unknown groups.

by lojic Sat May 11, 2002 18:57

Although I agree that the corporate media needs to be more professional I think that there's a definite media snow-job going on by Globalise Resistance. Look down the newswire fro the Gemma O'Doherty article posted by "Blisset" which has Joe Carolan saving the world when he's not busy spoon-feeding the apathetic.
Globalise Resistance are displaying very disturbing tendencies. I would feel great hesitation in working with them in the future unless the smarten up and start acting honestly.

by Claire B - student Sat May 11, 2002 19:59 clairebuk at oxygen dot ie

When did Joe Carolan become spokesperson for the "ordinary people"? Methinks his part in this week's protests is being blown out of all proportion.

by A Joe Lover - Joe for President Committee Sat May 11, 2002 20:00

It doesn't matter if you don't work with them - they'll still claim themselves as the organisers anyway.

by lojic Sat May 11, 2002 20:14

And so do you if your posting about it. If you dont care then dont post. Just ignore it.

by roy's keane - my own Sat May 11, 2002 20:20

I don't like using bad language but come on lads, who gives a FUCK what the irish times or rte or the independent or anyone else thinks. this is an INDEPENDENT media site, so could we please have no more rubbish about the importance or lack of, of what's said or not said in such publications etc. by the way i don't agree with talking to those media organissations anyway, they will fuck you over as soon as it suits them and we have already seen their misreprentations, they are so out of touch, i don't think they deserve to be put in the picture, let them figure it out for themselves. and anyway what purpose does it serve. and anyway both rts and gr appeared together on the late late last night so just give it up please.
thanking you in advance.

by fed up Sat May 11, 2002 20:21

it would be nice to read the newswire without having to "ignore" the faction fighting between gr/swp/anarchists/whoever, which is almost impossible given that the majority of "newswire" is some kind of propaganda war being fought between the swp and swp haters.

personally i am neither just fed up with the sniping. is it too much to ask for the gr/swp/anarchist war to call a ceasefire on indymedia?

thank you.

by roy's very keane Sat May 11, 2002 20:26

re: fed up
well said old chap, the wire will be a better, and safer place for everybody!

by lojic Sat May 11, 2002 20:44

Hell, Im ten times as fed up with people bitching about the bitching.

by GluttonMan Sat May 11, 2002 21:05

I agree that the presentation of this story was wrong. There should have been a link posted along with a summary making the central point.

That central point and summary should have been something along the lines of

------------------------------------------------
Dublin, May11th. GLOBALISE RESISTANCE persists in MEDIA MANIPULATION
In a tactic which is causing division and confusion on the part of the left, Globalise Resistance -- a would-be umbrella group or "popular front" for anti-globalisation in Britain and Ireland, have portrayed themselves as the organising force behind the Reclaim The Streets protests.

Joe Carolan, a spokesperson for GR, contacted many media organisations in the aftermath of the police riot portraying himself as a "spokesman" for all the non-aligned people that turned up to Reclaim The Streets.

This caused much of the time which should have been devoted to articulating the ethos and excitement of RTS to be spent in ensuring that it was made clear that GR and Joe Carolan especially are not in anyway representatives of those that were out partying.

In a further demonstration of GR's attempt to pose as a relevant movement they called a protest before the blood had dried on the heads of people that would rather Joe had let them voice their own concerns.

This was followed up by Nora Geraghty (of Globalise Resistance) posting a disingenuous letter to the Irish Times which conveyed the impression that Globalise Resistance was speaking for Reclaim The Streets. This letter studiously avoided any disclaimer that GR was associated with RTS.

This type of divisive, aggressive and opportunistic posturing is reminiscent of another organisation. It gets nothing good done.

Although the corporate media will frequently spin things in a way that is to the disadvantage of activists they have a wider audience than indymedia does. It is very likely that many people that read the GR misrepresentation will assume that RTS is dominated by people with GR's unappealling and irrelevant attitudes and beliefs. Allowing this to occur without challenge means that many that might turn up if they understood the fun and excitement there was there will be put off.

Not relying upon corporate media, distrusting and challenging it does not imply that we should not correct it when it gets it badly wrong.

This subversion of our protest by GR should not pass unchallenged. If the upswell of discontent and activism is harnessed by GR for their authoritarian ends then it will end like every other authoritarian protest movement: with compromise with the state and Joe Carlolan as a TD.

--------------------------------------------------

by Myles Sat May 11, 2002 21:18

I'm sick of name calling! When people expose the SWP/GR and their dirty tricks, lies, manipulations, oportunism, fascistic methods they are called anarchists.

by Phuq Hedd Sat May 11, 2002 21:30

Although I am an anarchist (and proud of it) I echo Myles's comment. If this story doesn't fit the remit of Indymedia.ie I don't know what does. A major police riot occurs and then a sinister Trotskyist front tries to hijack it for its own ends. Its local, its political, it may affect the future of activism in Ireland.

by Stephen Rigney Sat May 11, 2002 21:47

I think Joe Carolan is just an egotistical maniac in love with his own voice. Every single event he hijacks and makes himself into the emcee with his megaphone etc. He just likes to get himself seen and heard as much as he can

by Comrade Jim Sat May 11, 2002 23:31

Joe was on the late late show... wow could of fooled me. it seemed he didn't really know what he was talking about.

And what the hell did he do at the end it looked liked he gave the two fingers to somebody in the crowd.

by Wowed Sun May 12, 2002 02:34

Yous lot are so analytical. Its feckin marvellous that Indymedia provide such an in depth analysis of political events. Its amazing that you've identified the major problem in society someone called Joe Carolan. This bastard must be some sort of Berlusconi, le Pen type of character. More hated than all the main-stream leaders. Probably more of a danger than the combined forces of the G8, WTO, IMF etc Up here in the North we don't know who he is but you lot are so clued in, its brilliant. Surely you must inspire most of Ireland to rise up and grab the system by the balls. Fantastic stuff. Keep up the goodwork. How can we synthesise people. Do you call demos and such stuff, or is that just reactionary shite? Remember the revolution is only an email away.

by lojic Sun May 12, 2002 03:11

eff yez write like dat den yez'll convey a workin class ballsiness to yer down-ter-eart posts dat really showz up de "middle class analytical" sdnobs dat does be posting on indymedia. Yez must be right if yez can tell it like it iz.
Are yez off to take some kneecaps off some young fella then, you with yer "major problem in society" ye posh git.
An doan fergit the feckin swearin te add veracity to yer post ye fuckwit?
Are yez consairned wit synthesising people up in de Nort dere? Shure dats great, what will de boys be up tae next.
Nae feck off an spare us yer ane "analysis" big man.

by Ali la Pointe - fu fighting sex bombs Sun May 12, 2002 03:21

It's because of the lack of democracy in the "Movement" allowing GR/SWP to substitute themselves for it.

Debate is good. I always worry when I see people kicking up a fuss about something they are uncomfortable with being slammed for doing it. If we are going to challenge society's structures, we need to challenge our own organisational structures.

by Wowed Sun May 12, 2002 03:25

Oh, did I touch a soft spot ilojics. Oh you must have spent a wee while translating hide your background. Nevertheless, if you can't deal with analysis, then give mummy back her pc and go back to spending her lolly. On the other hand gimme some in depth coverage of the major problems you face and the magic solutions you have come up with.

by Nora Geraghty - Globalise Resistance Sun May 12, 2002 10:04

Thanx for posting my lettrer on the internet, I was rather pleased with it. I didn't realise it would be such a subject for debate, I'm pretty sure I didn't claim to represent all the people there, but if you want to see it that way..... I get bored with saying this, but I am not a member of the SWP, nor am I a trotskyist, actually I'm going out canvassing for Eric Byrne this afternoon, does that make me a part of the conspiracy? Or am I one of the unfortunate fools being taken in by it? I hope you lot manage to sort all this out in time for the next demo. It would be nice to think that you could use all your intellegence and energy for debate in the service of something useful.

by Ian - GR etc Sun May 12, 2002 12:38 ian at theplateau dot com

Hi All,
All this criticism of GR is all very well, but do you not thing that if GR, or a few people who really drive GR, hadn't called for this protest when they did - it wouldn't have happened?

I think that the protest was spectacularly successful for everyone.

RTS doesn't own the issues of guardai violence, uncaccountability and political repression.

Similarly, GR didn't own the protest, and RTS and other groups were very sucessful in "reclaiming the protest" - I think that's a great phrase, we should keep using it. While GR got good publicity for calling the protest, I didn't see any actual media coverage of GR at the protest itself. The travellers groups got more coverage at the actual protest that GR per say, and I think this is great!

I think everyone in GR would love it if people would "reclaim GR". It seems to me that its dominated by the people who are actually willing and able to actually do some work organising. And believe me, all are welcome to join this group.

I'm a socialist (although I have many other hats, and don't like to be pegged), but wouldn't it be great if anarchist and environmentalists and third world solidarity types and love faries and people who just want a better world would without being labeled at all were to put energies into organising and fought the socialist dominance of GR with their numbers and enthusiasm. The could happen, it really could.

Or if the name GR is too tainted for some people, the how about another organisation? Maybe an umbrella for the umbrellas. Imagine if we could all work together.

Maybe I'm dreaming.

Sigh,
Ian

by Pissed off - GR (not SWP) Sun May 12, 2002 13:06

Dear Joe,
it would be very easy for you to sort out this mess.
Why don't you post your version of events. Contacts with the media, what you told them, etc. If you don't do it, people will continue to think that you have something to hide and have behaved dishonestly. I'm beginning to believe that there is something dodgy going on. As a member of GR (but not for long, I'm getting very tired of this mess) I want to know the truth. Joe, I know that you read this newswire, please do the right thing. Other members of GR, please ask him to reply.

by Nora Geraghty - Globalise Resistance Sun May 12, 2002 16:40

OK, I'll ask Joe to reply as soon as he gets back to Dublin. But for the record we never claimed to have organized RTS, and we never claimed that it was an anti-capitalist demo. I have been at pains to say clearly on the radio, in newspapers and to the cameras that they have misconstrued this, but I guess they like the sound of it. Joe was asked by an organiser of RTS, who wished to remain anonymous, to read their press release to the press conference, which he did. To state that we are not associated with RTS at all would be silly as it is clearly not true, RTS like GR is an umbrella group, and open to all. We are used to dealing with media and we don't mind being identified, that's the only reason why we were the ones who called the protest, anyone else could have done it and we would have supported them. Lastly, Ian if you are dreaming then I am dreaming too, isn't there something in a John Lennon song about that?

by lojic Sun May 12, 2002 17:32

not fucking likely. im going to be avoiding any place that you and GR are. you have completely avoided addressing the issue which is that your letter combined with the other actions taken by GR leadership conveyed the impression that RTS was associated with you.

you say that you wont dissociate yourself from RTS because "its obviously not true"

well its also obviously true that you have no mandate to speak on behalf or about me and other participants.

unless you make that clear then your engaged in misrepresentation.

you could clear this up easily with a public statement copied to all the other places that youve spread your disinformation.

until that happens i will (and i know a lot of others will) refuse to take part in any event in which GR has part.

by Pissed off - GR (not SWP) Sun May 12, 2002 18:34

Thanks Nora. Please tell Joe that he must account for his actions on this newswire. I'm suire that his explanation will stop this endless infighting. Please tell him that he must explain his position, otherwise our reputation will be irreparably damaged.

by insurgent Sun May 12, 2002 20:03

Ok, with no transparent democratic decision making structures an apt clique, not of chums but of SWP heads make all decisions in GR, hence why all of us on the left who would have considered our selves members of GR couldnt be assed having anything today with it as its ran by the politburo of the SWP. Now imagine if Princess Grace Of Monopolise Resistance and Uncle Joe had of organised the proposed and voted upon GR conference...my, thereld probably be a democratic structure in place, we wouldnt be sitting here bickering like fuck and the first time id hear of GR actions wouldnt be on a poster in town but as a grass roots Gr activist involved in calling it...

by Comrade Jim Sun May 12, 2002 20:56

How is it going out in Dublin South central,

Nora its clear you are not a member of SWP. But GR is used by the SWP for their own use. Joe is a member of SWP and isn't afraid of using his position to recruit member. Labour on the other hand don't openly go around recruiting member under the Name GR

Do you not think it about time that GR is stripped down and rebuilt with a bit more of a democratic structure. And not allow political groups to affiliate with GR.

by Don Sun May 12, 2002 21:45

"or a few people who really drive GR"

- Ian do you think that is the case in G.R.?
If not when was the meeting called to decide
on the protest?

If you are a socialist you believe in common ownership how can you have common ownership without common participation in the decision making process?

"hadn't called for this protest when they did - it wouldn't have happened?"

So R.T.S. say would be incapable of calling it, despite having just organised one of the best actions in Dublin ever.
The speed was so as the S.W.P. (sorry I mean "G.R.") could dominate the media coverage and recruit.

"I think that the protest was spectacularly successful for everyone."

I don't think the S.W.P. was too pleased at the way people wouldn't disperse. Visibly shaken I would say.

In any case the march came close to being the exact opposite of reclaiming the street, legal and with liason with the very people we are supposed to be protesting against.
Not a difference of tactic but a complete difference of ethos.

"I think everyone in GR would love it if people would "reclaim GR". It seems to me that its dominated by the people who are actually willing and able to actually do some work organising. And believe me, all are welcome to join this group."

Sure all are welcome to join it - that is the purpose of a front group. Unfortunately not everyone in GR wants a democratic organisation - that's why their never was the conference to decide upon the structure of the organisation (back when GR had lot's of non-SWP people involved in it) as Insurgent has pointed out.
As a speaker put it at the SWP s Marxism 2001 conference, "The united front is a way for a tiny minority to win over lots of people Globalise Resistance is a united front."

"were to put energies into organising and fought the socialist dominance of GR with their numbers and enthusiasm. The could happen, it really could."

People tried it already – join the global_irl mailing list look at the messages in August of last year particularly 890 which has links to ones on this debate earlier and after that ones with names such as “My Euros Worth” and other monetary monikers. You will also see there an example of a typical S.W.P. tactic when criticised ‘oh it’s the anarchists’ (while often the person claiming this pretends not to be a swimmer), so they can pretend this is just sectarian “in-fighting” or some such – we saw this recently with ‘oh it’s the anarchist complaining about recent events’ – when actually the vast bulk of the Anarcho posts on this issue have been ‘yeah we know GR/SWP opportunism etc.. but come to Thursday’s demo. anyways’.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/global_irl/

Ian, I’m in favour of broad organisation too, but if you want me, and many more people in it, it must be based on direct action and democracy. Now the day the S.W.P. take up those is the day Paisley becomes the Pope.

One broad network is the Grassroots Gathering see http://struggle.ws/wsm/news/2002/gatheringMARCH.html

Which when it organised a demo at Shannon airport last year about the re-fuelling of American jets (a damn site more useful than marching in circles around Dublin), the S.W.P. refused to work with it, for very good reason – it, the S.W.P., does not want independent organisation outside it’s control. That would get in the way of building Party Power.

Likewise North West Globalise Resistance was independent of the S.W.P., until they organised all their activists to go to the meetings and outnumber everyone.

Folks we need two things, one independent activists to organise themselves into small broad groups, two these groups to form a network umbrella organisation.

We also need a record of the activities and reality of G.R. to demonstrate to people rightly attracted to the idea of everybody working together to show them that isn’t it, because this is going to run and run, at least until the S.W.P. find something else to provide them with new recruits (back to the Anti-Nazi League?).

Everyone should read Monopolise Resistance http://www.schnews.org.uk/monopresist/index.htm

by Ian Mon May 13, 2002 10:25 ian at theplateau dot com

Hi Don -

"or a few people who really drive GR"

- Ian do you think that is the case in G.R.?
If not when was the meeting called to decide
on the protest?

If you are a socialist you believe in common ownership how can you have common ownership without common participation in the decision making process?

--- Of course. I also think that if we wait for everything to be perfect before we do anything then we will never do anything on time. I don't think there was time to call a meeting to discuss this. Plus I think it was an obvious think to do.

"hadn't called for this protest when they did - it wouldn't have happened?"

So R.T.S. say would be incapable of calling it, despite having just organised one of the best actions in Dublin ever.
The speed was so as the S.W.P. (sorry I mean "G.R.") could dominate the media coverage and recruit.

--- All respect to RTS. Of course I think they were capable of organising it. But from what I read here, many RTS people were dead against it. And if RTS had organised an overtly political rally, complete with marshalls and police liason (which I think were completely appropriate here) it wouldn't really be RTS anymore, no? So I'm not saying that RTS couldn't pull it off. Just that I really think they wouldn't have, and for reasons that I completely respect.

---And I don't see GR dominating media coverage. Its not a zero sum game. I think everyone got more publicity that they otherwise would have.

"I think that the protest was spectacularly successful for everyone."

I don't think the S.W.P. was too pleased at the way people wouldn't disperse. Visibly shaken I would say.

---- But overall I think the SWP was delighted.

In any case the march came close to being the exact opposite of reclaiming the street, legal and with liason with the very people we are supposed to be protesting against.
Not a difference of tactic but a complete difference of ethos.

--- Yes, and all respect to RTS for supporting the demo regardless. If they hadn't I would have completely understood. But I think to have that kind of a demo went was entirely fair enough in the circumastances. Would another street party have attracted, say, travellers in the same way (RTE made a point of pointing out their presence. What a shame they weren't asked to speak.)? Would it have won the same level of public support and "claimed the moral high ground" (as I think the Indo put it)?

--- RTS does not own the issue of protestors getting the shit beaten out of them, nor the issue of Guarda accountability. And if a group that supports RTS wants to hold an overtly political demo, how can a nonhierarchical leaderless collective of volunteers demand that they don't? And GR didn't own the protest- which was great.

"I think everyone in GR would love it if people would "reclaim GR". It seems to me that its dominated by the people who are actually willing and able to actually do some work organising. And believe me, all are welcome to join this group."

Sure all are welcome to join it - that is the purpose of a front group. Unfortunately not everyone in GR wants a democratic organisation - that's why their never was the conference to decide upon the structure of the organisation (back when GR had lot's of non-SWP people involved in it) as Insurgent has pointed out.
As a speaker put it at the SWP s Marxism 2001 conference, "The united front is a way for a tiny minority to win over lots of people Globalise Resistance is a united front."

--- Its not just about joining. Its about joining and fighting against SWP hegemony. I'm a member of the SWP, and I whinge about this incessantly. SWP culture does tend to dominate a group like GR. What I'm suggesting is that if enough non SWP people joined, and we engaged in open dialogue, we could really address these issues. I think most SWP people would be able to take this criticisms on board if they were made in the right way. Of course GR is a bit of an SWP front. But it doesn't have to be that way. We don't have to let it be that.

"were to put energies into organising and fought the socialist dominance of GR with their numbers and enthusiasm. The could happen, it really could."

People tried it already – join the global_irl mailing list look at the messages in August of last year particularly 890 which has links to ones on this debate earlier and after that ones with names such as “My Euros Worth” and other monetary monikers. You will also see there an example of a typical S.W.P. tactic when criticised ‘oh it’s the anarchists’ (while often the person claiming this pretends not to be a swimmer), so they can pretend this is just sectarian “in-fighting” or some such – we saw this recently with ‘oh it’s the anarchist complaining about recent events’ – when actually the vast bulk of the Anarcho posts on this issue have been ‘yeah we know GR/SWP opportunism etc.. but come to Thursday’s demo. anyways’.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/global_irl/

---Yes, I'm familiar with the phenomenon. SWP dismiss important criticism as "anarchist wrecking", anarchists (etc) dismiss SWP behaviour as lenninist authoritarianism, and refuse to cooperate exactly where anachist influence is needed most. It makes we just want to go home and watch TV, give up on trying to change anything, and leave the status quo to their looting and pillaging. Lucking, I don't own a TV.

Ian, I’m in favour of broad organisation too, but if you want me, and many more people in it, it must be based on direct action and democracy. Now the day the S.W.P. take up those is the day Paisley becomes the Pope.

--- OK, this is what we all want. But can I suggest that its not about waiting for the SWP to reform to the point where GR can recruit you to a broad organisation.

---I think we had a real opportunity to do this is the fall, but were hit with the Burlington and the War. The war distracted people, this is understandable. But it seemed to me at the time that the police violence really succeded in driving a lot of people away from GR too. This is not necessarily a widely held belief, but regardles, after the Burlington, GR fizzled. Our WTO demo was feeble. And the thinking was that no one was interested enough in GR at the time had so little momentum that there was no point in holding a conference. Maybe its too late for GR. Maybe we should have had that conference before S11. We could have addressed the issues at the time. MAybe we still can.

--- But no, I empahtically do not believe that there has been a serious attempt make to Reclaim GR. People got pissed off, assumed the worst, and left. I read some good criticisms of GR on global_irl, but it seemed that no one was willing to make to effort to follow them.

One broad network is the Grassroots Gathering see http://struggle.ws/wsm/news/2002/gatheringMARCH.html

--- So I've just read this, very cool. But doesn't it exclude refomers? I personally don't accept the reformist/ revolutionary dichotomy (which make me a heretic in the SWP of course). GG sounds excellent - for libertarians - and I'm sympathetic to libertarianism, but I really want something broader. What I'm interested in is engaging people. Not in recruiting for one organisation or another. Radicalisatin is a process. Most people are unlikely to make the leap right to socialism/libertarianism/whateverism. I would like a group broad enough to include people who support, for instance, George Soros' demands for a fairer, more equitable form of globalisation (but that still leave people like Soros disguistingly wealthy and powerful of course) - we can only bennefit from such diverstiy of ideas.
Giving, say, Socialist worker or anarchist literature to most I the people I have contact with is not a particularly meaningful form of engagement. Its just alienating. There is some ral diversity in GR. Just not nearly enough.

---But of course we need some of the spirit of GG in GR. And, I conjecture, GG could use some of the organisation of GR.

Which when it organised a demo at Shannon airport last year about the re-fuelling of American jets (a damn site more useful than marching in circles around Dublin), the S.W.P. refused to work with it, for very good reason – it, the S.W.P., does not want independent organisation outside it’s control. That would get in the way of building Party Power.

--- Don't know much about this. I've heard such accusations before.

Likewise North West Globalise Resistance was independent of the S.W.P., until they organised all their activists to go to the meetings and outnumber everyone.

--- Don't know the story here either.

Folks we need two things, one independent activists to organise themselves into small broad groups, two these groups to form a network umbrella organisation.

--- Ok, so an umbrella that would include GR and Grassroots etc? I'll support this. I'd rather merge the two, under a new name if you like, but this is perhaps more realistic.

--- People organising themselves? Yes! Again yes! Only mostly they don't. And where are you going to learn how to do this, but in an organisation.

We also need a record of the activities and reality of G.R. to demonstrate to people rightly attracted to the idea of everybody working together to show them that isn’t it, because this is going to run and run, at least until the S.W.P. find something else to provide them with new recruits (back to the Anti-Nazi League?).

--- The reality of GR is that it is flawed, but it does some very good things, and has some very good people. And at the end of the day this is why I'm there - things happen. Wait for the theory to be perfect and you'll wait forever. We need not just to fight capitalism, but inertia, and the residue of capitalism within our own organising.

---I am so completely open to suggestions here as to the way forward.

Solidarity,
Ian

by NM Mon May 13, 2002 11:15 Dublin

I think those who objecting to this letter and the behaviour of GR are completely over reacting. They have attemped to clear up the misconception that they were responsible for organising RTS so get over it. Its in the past and its nothing to dwell on. Personally I am no fan of GR but you have to see things in prespective. If you think about it as someone has already mentioned without them the demo on thrusday would never have been organised, so no matter what your own personal adgenda against them and Joe Carolin you have to give them credit for getting up and doing something. Yes Mondays events was a RTS event, but RTS belongs to everyone who feels that way about our city and our space so to try and gain ownership over it by including everyone but GR into the mis is pointless. Yes they didnt organise it, Yes they have said so. So why are you guys still talking about it.
If you think about it your time would be better spent now devising a plan of what is to come next now that there is so much media attention(not that the attention is necessarily on your cause). This constant bickering gets you nowhere. No matter what happens now GR will be a part of it. So you can either try and get along a work for a common cause despite all your hang ups and lack of trust for them. Or continue along this strain of fights and pathetic mudslinging and your cause will be forgotten along with many other great causes that went before them just because people couldnt work together.

by Don Mon May 13, 2002 12:55

Hello Ian, Thanks for contributing.

My Previous Post” If you are a socialist you believe in common ownership how can you have common ownership without common participation in the decision making process? “

Ian ”Of course. I also think that if we wait for everything to be perfect before we do anything then we will never do anything on time. I don't think there was time to call a meeting to discuss this. Plus I think it was an obvious think to do. “

So that’s just a wee blip in normally democratic practice then.

Fair enough, the S.W.P. is an organization founded on the ideas of Lenin, Trotsky, Marx, Engels, correct?

It is possible to join the S.W.P. without knowing anything of those ideas, correct? One doesn’t have to read Lenin before hand.

Consequently if there was any kind of democracy in the organization and it recruited a lot of people (which it does, does it not) soon it’s policy would not be based on Lenin, Marx, etc…

It is not democracy not even representative democracy (which as an anarchist I do not believe in but still).

As you yourself have admitted you cannot have common ownership without common participation in the decision making process consequently we cannot regard the S.W.P. as socialist.

“But from what I read here, many RTS people were dead against it.”

In form, organization and given that it was a G.R./SW.P. hijack stunt (you need to recognize as real the fact the two ethos here are pole opposites. No direct action is not police liaison. If you want ineffectual marching plus listening to speeches– and that is what Thursday’s demo. would have been but for the escape from S.W.P. control, then you are in the right organization. They could have asked even. No one would be opposed to an action against police brutality. The only question concerned the form and content of such an action.

“But overall I think the SWP was delighted.”

Probably were – they don’t tell the membership much, do they. The leaders didn’t seem too pleased.

In any case the march came close to being the exact opposite of reclaiming the street, legal and with liaison with the very people we are supposed to be protesting against.
Not a difference of tactic but a complete difference of ethos.

“Would another street party have attracted, say, travellers in the same way (RTE made a point of pointing out their presence. What a shame they weren't asked to speak.)? Would it have won the same level of public support and "claimed the moral high ground" (as I think the Indo put it)? “

Travelers have some kind of objection to partying, that’s a new one on me, partying looses you the ‘moral high ground’. Shit dangerous stuff partying.

Just an example of how the S.W.P. panders to what the Garda/Media/Establishement regard as acceptable forms of dissent. Ineffectual, uninteresting, - it’s why it is regarded as acceptable.

“ And if a group that supports RTS wants to hold an overtly political demo, how can a nonhierarchical leaderless collective of volunteers demand that they don't? And GR didn't own the protest- which was great.”

C’mon you simply have to recognize the difference in ethos, the fact that the S.W.P./G.R. claimed to be the organizers of the R.T.S. and jumped on the bandwagon in order to recruit, and gain a bit of cred off something which is the exact opposite of what the S.W.P. is about, and what the S.W.P. is quite opposed to (you may not be but then you don’t make the decisions).

“Its not just about joining. Its about joining and fighting against SWP hegemony. I'm a member of the SWP, and I whinge about this incessantly. SWP culture does tend to dominate a group like GR. What I'm suggesting is that if enough non SWP people joined, and we engaged in open dialogue, we could really address these issues. I think most SWP people would be able to take this criticisms on board if they were made in the right way. Of course GR is a bit of an SWP front. But it doesn't have to be that way. We don't have to let it be that. “

People tried it. Didn’t work. The S.W.P. made sure it didn’t work. This is basic practice for Leninist groups – the front organization which doesn’t have an independent existence and merely exists to funnel people into the party. If you don’t like it well what are you doing in the S.W.P.?

“OK, this is what we all want. But can I suggest that its not about waiting for the SWP to reform
to the point where GR can recruit you to a broad organisation.”
Aye it is impossible to have a broad organization with the S.W.P. – because their aim is to control everything.

Again it might not be your aim, but since when did you make the decisions in that organization.

“I think we had a real opportunity to do this is the fall, but were hit with the Burlington and the War. The war distracted people, this is understandable. But it seemed to me at the time that the police violence really succeded in driving a lot of people away from GR too. This is not necessarily a widely held belief, but regardles, after the Burlington, GR fizzled. Our WTO demo was feeble. And the thinking was that no one was interested enough in GR at the time had so little momentum that there was no point in holding a conference. Maybe its too late for GR. Maybe we should have had that conference before S11. We could have addressed the issues at the time. MAybe we still can. “

People left G.R. cause they were sick of S.W.P. domination and woke up as to what the purpose of G.R. was. Events like the Burlington and the war would increase people’s involvement in G.R. if it was a real organization. Again you seem to regard democracy as an optional extra. Well it isn’t it is essential and you can not have a broad organization without it because if ALL are not participating in the decision making process it’s not broad, is it? Merely a lot of different people following the S.W.P. .

“I read some good criticisms of GR on global_irl, but it seemed that no one was willing to make to effort to follow them.”

Aye I’ll let ex-G.R. members argue that. But suffice to say when an ‘inner circle’ runs the thing and doesn’t call meetings where you can formulate a decision making structure. Well how can your ‘reform’ that.

Again you are assuming based on no empirical evidence that I can see, and lot that say’s the opposite, that the S.W.P. want G.R. to be a broad, democratic organization.

“So I've just read this, very cool. But doesn't it exclude reformers? I personally don't accept the reformist/ revolutionary dichotomy (which make me a heretic in the SWP of course). GG sounds excellent - for libertarians - and I'm sympathetic to libertarianism, but I really want something broader. What I'm interested in is engaging people. Not in recruiting for one organisation or another. Radicalisatin is a process. Most people are unlikely to make the leap right to socialism/libertarianism/whateverism. “

The term libertarian refers to when people who practice direct democracy (i.e. people in the organization actually get to make decisions) and direct action (actually doing something not asking for it to be done e.g. RTS).

It is not an “ideology” or another name for anarchism when I use it. (it can aim for reform or revolution, in my opinion to be consistent it must be revolutionary, but that’s just my opinion).

If you don’t believe in direct democracy and direct action there is little point in broad organization.

Why (one) it’s not broad without participation in decision making from all the people who are involved in it (two) if you want ineffectual marching, and petitions to overthrow capitalism, well my advice is join the S.W.P.

“But of course we need some of the spirit of GG in GR. And, I conjecture, GG could use some of the organisation of GR.”

Yeah sure if we wanted people to make decisions for us then we would join G.R. , Actually if we wanted that we would love going to work and not be involved in activism at all, after all we already have people to make decisions for us.

“Don't know much about this. I've heard such accusations before.

“Don't know the story here either. “

So you don’t know enough about the actions of your organization to saw whether or not what I have said is true.

Democracy how are ye.

Me Previous: ” Folks we need two things, one independent activists to organise themselves into small broad groups, two these groups to form a network umbrella organisation. “

Ian: “Ok, so an umbrella that would include GR and Grassroots etc? I'll support this. I'd rather merge the two, under a new name if you like, but this is perhaps more realistic. “

The S.W.P. does not want broad organization, it wants funnels to draw in new recruits, this has been the case for ever, this is why it doesn’t have democracy in G.R. . How can you have broad organization without democracy.

Ian: “People organising themselves? Yes! Again yes! Only mostly they don't. And where are you going to learn how to do this, but in an organisation. “

You can only learn how to do something by doing it, S.W.P./G.R. does not represent self-organization but rather organization by the bosses (the PC or Central Committee), paper sales by the workers (the rank and file members).
The managers where I work from time to time do what I do (so Keiran Allen can sell papers) the question is who makes the decisions.

Existing organizations should encourage this, self organisation. Again Ian if you agree with this, you ought to know it’s the opposite of what the S.W.P. are about.

“The reality of GR is that it is flawed, but it does some very good things, and has some very good people. And at the end of the day this is why I'm there - things happen. Wait for the theory to be perfect and you'll wait forever. We need not just to fight capitalism, but inertia, and the residue of capitalism within our own organizing.”

Yes it is much easier to join the S.W.P./G.R. and have everything organized for you, not to go through the cumbersome process of giving everyone an equal say, but if that’s what you want why try to change society? When I go to work I have a manager to tell me what to do, where the difference?

“I am so completely open to suggestions here as to the way forward. “

If you want socialism you have to want democracy (and you do seem to). Consequently my advice to you is (one) form or get involved in a group that combines democracy with socialism (two) network with similar groups.

It is a lot easier to slot into the already existing Leninist outfits than attempt to build a broad libertarian movement where one doesn’t exist. However what’s the point of helping something which you don’t seem to agree with and which is the exact opposite of socialism.

For newcomers read about the internal democracy of the S.W.P. here http://www.indymedia.ie/cgi-bin/newswire.cgi?id=2732

We are not ‘all on the same side’, some people believe in democracy, in an equal say, in participation for all in the decision making process (only possible basis of socialism) and some don’t.

And that is an unbridgeable gap.

by chris Mon May 13, 2002 14:49

So some woman writes a letter to a newspaper, puts 'Globalise Resistance' at the bottom, and all of a sudden she's supposed to be the anti-Christ. Magnificent. Say, you can serialize the indymedia follies, so the rest of the world can enjoy the deluded rantings of bitter leftists?

chris

by Chris kisser Mon May 13, 2002 19:29

that should put a stop to the debate that you don't want to see taking place! Cunning!

by Marcos Mon May 13, 2002 19:42

Zapatism has got rid of the left.
we don't care about the left, we care about the majority of the people, of the working class who don't identify themselves with the left at all.
Whose fault is that? do you blame the working class? are the workers backwards?
we say that it is the left's fault. down with the left, power to the people.

by andtheartof Tue May 14, 2002 03:11

At least barry got a flight to new york.

by Nora Geraghty - Globalise Resistance Wed May 15, 2002 18:51

Hey lojic, Sorry for failing to clearly state that I do not speak for you. I feel in the interest of honesty I should also admit that I didn't clearly state that I am not the captain of the Starship Enterprize, nor am I a brain surgeon. I apologise for these obvious attempts to mislead the media. I think we can probably get by without your participation, though it will be hard on everyone.

by Capn Spock - The Federation Thu May 16, 2002 06:43

Sir, - It is important to clear up a popular misconception about the Reclaim the Streets party last Monday. Although a tiny number of those present had an affinity with Trotskyists, the party was actually about decentralised direct action reclaiming Dublin's public spaces for the ordinary citizens. After all the construction and development that Dublin has undergone in recent years, the city remains one of the worst in Europe for cycle lanes, public spaces and public transport. Everyone is aware that traffic is reaching epidemic proportions; even capitalists and trotskyists were welcome to join the party.

The notion put forward by Nora Geraghty (May 8th) that she could speak those who took part in the party is just not so. Most of the partiers were not anything to do with a bandwaggon-jumping opportunist. They just wanted to have fun in a peaceful and enjoyable way.

The idea that GR were can speak on behalf or RTS is absurd and offensive to anyone who believes in basic human rights. The Joe Carloan interviews and Nora Geraghty letters have irritated the party-goers as many people had thought that vanguardist politics were a thing of the past.

Joe Carolan and the Nora of Geraghty would do well not to try to brush this one off as a slight over-reaction. The role of members in any civilised umbrella group is that they are obliged not to try and usurp power within that group. Indeed SWP Party Central needs to provide adequate training for its officers to enable them to remain calm in the face of taunting by unarmed citizens.

There is much to suggest that RTS posed a threat to GR and the SWP and the inconvenience to Joe Carolan was matched only by the exciting opportunity for disinformation.

The SWP in other European cities have managed to subvert similar protests without recourse to openness. Reclaim the Streets has become an important part of European youth culture, and the SWP has sniffed out a potential new recruiting ground. If something is not done to prevent future episodes of this nature, and to reprimand the officers involved, I predict a time when activists come from all over Europe will run for the hills, and the emphasis will shift from fun, effective direct action to shouting slogans and marching in circles after liasing with the police and trying to sell them newspapers.

I urge the Nora for Geraghty to take swift and decisive action. - Yours, etc.,

Capn Spock,

Federation of United Fronts,

Starship Enterprise,

Deep Space,

Galaxy

by Spock Thu May 16, 2002 21:01

Say something funny you daft sod