|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Lockdown Skeptics
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Assembly Elections and SP, SWP and Greens Activists national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Thursday May 01, 2003 12:45 by Killian Forde
 Well? Now that the Assembly elections are to be cancelled will the SWP, SP and Greens mobilise against this 'parking' of democracy? We all worked together, fairly well it has to be said, on the anti-war stuff, we have had a poorer record on effective co-operation on other issues, e.g local charges, however I think we would all agree that a Government(s) that continually suspend democracy (four times) and postpone elections (twice) because the likely result is not to its satisfaction is, at least, dangerously malleable on the principle of democracy and at worst, fascist. Lets face it the SP and Greens have extremely lame, unrealistic and effectively fence sitting policies with regards to 6 counties/Northern Ireland. I would like to hear the grassroot attitude to the suspension of elections from these party members and also what actions they think they would support to ensure that the elctions and the democractic process is rescheuled. I, like an awful amount of republicians feel that the rest of the left in Ireland would be screaming blue murder and highly active if a similiar patterns of events that has occured in Ireland over the past, say 6 months, had taken place in a small African or Asian country. It is time for the left to engage positively with this issue of Ireland. I know that the conflict, its causes, effects and legacy is difficult to deal with for many Irish people of all religions, however we cannot 'wish it away' and at the same time satisfy our need to want for the world to be a better place to live by exclusively focusing on overseas deserving areas or peoples who are being abused or disenfranchised. Heres hoping for some positivity this time 'round. |
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (39 of 39)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39The elections were cancelled because the Dublin and London Juntas knew the SP were going to be swept into power.
with Killian on a lot of things he said, especially the incredible ability of elements of the left who get hot and bothered about something happening thousands of miles away and ignore similar, even greater issues, in Ireland, I think it's a bit harsh to describe the Green and SP policies as he does.
Certainly, that would be my analysis, as it would be Sinn Féin's, but I'm sure their attitude to our analysis of the Six is similar, the issue isn't whose Northern policy is better, but whether the SP, Greens, SWP, WSM et al, are going to fight against the undemocratic suspension of elections to the Assembly. Surely that is something we can all agree on. It's up to them.
I'd say that this type of thing underlines one of anarchism's most basic criticism's of our representative 'democracy'. Democracy is granted to people only in so much as the people will return the right result. The fact that the state can, and often does, remove the people's 'democratic perogative' when it looks like they have gotten above themselves and aren't going to return the correct result - when they have ceased to be a 'responsible electorate' - shows just how hollow this democracy is.
So, in terms of fighting against this suspension of democracy, I don't see the point. The state is only going to allow democracy within the strict limits that it has decided upon. Sure, you can stretch those limits if the state feels that it is under serious pressure from the streets and needs to bring the opposition back into parliament where it can once again control it within slightly less narrow bounds. But what's the point in fighting to force the state to channel the struggle into a narrowly defined and mostly impotent chamber? Much better to fight for what you want and forget about parliament. The elf confidence of the working class and its ability to organise itself are much more powerful tools than any parliament will ever be.
Well, firstly i think attacking a political group for NOT having a petty nationalistic mindset and concentrating on real problems in society and the environment is a bit absurd. Not that i'm any fan of the SP or the Greens (though members of both parties occasionally buy me drinks), but what exactly IS a "realistic" position on "the six counties" if your ideology stems from bioregionalism or from Trotskyism?
Secondly, suspension of the assembly elections undemocratic? Don't make me laugh- the assembly has spent more time suspended than running (largely because when it was running the politicians in it had to deal with real problems which they didn't understand, having spent their entire lives forming "realistic" positions on "the North"). On the few occasions when actual decisions were made by the assembly they were universally appalling (planning issues especially).
It is as yet unclear _what_ exactly they'd be elected _for_- is it to make decisions about real issues or to continue suspending themselves at enormous cost to the ordinary people of the North[1]? Will there be another sleep-deprivation contest to write another brain-damaged constitution? Will the "new agreement" be sold to people with the thinly veiled (and inaccurate) threat that the _only_ alternative possible is eternal Paisley and punishment beatings?
You might as well ask people to vote for their favourite tellytubby and assure them that the winning tellytubby will have "some sort of role" in the future of "something". It makes about as much sense.
[1] Only Strasbourg is more expensive per man-hour than Stormont.
Yes there should be a campaign for democracy in the North.
And there should be a campaign for a Left alternative which should and will refuse to enter into coalitions with bourgeois and right wing parties.This refers to both the Greens and Sinn Fein.
Sinn Fein by going into coalition in the Northern Administration (Yes Administration not government) are making themselves responsible for the inevitable cutbacks.Cutbacks because they have absolutely no taxation powers and anyway in a permanent coalition with rightwing parties they would never get permission to preserve social services never mind extend them.
I say this as someone who regards Sinn Fein activists with respect and who regards those opposed to the ceasefire as lunatics.In most workingclass areas in the South with few exceptions it is Sinn Fein that is providing the leadership against the status quo. The exceptions are a scattering of SP and independents with the SWP trailing quite far behind. In the North everyone else does not even register on any political Richter scale.
The same fate awaits both Greens and Sinn Fein if they are tricked, cajoled or tempted by the illusion of power into going into coalitions in the South.
Clann na Phoblachta was tempted and betrayed and disappeared. I hope the Greens and Sinn Fein avoid the same fate. I am depressed about it as I feel the consequent disillusion will not lead to their rivals on the Left growing but to apathy.
The Left needs to struggle for real power to change society not tinker at the edges or play with the crumbs of patronage.
I don't think left wing parties like the SP or the SWP can possibly campaign for democracy with any credibility, when they do not operate it internally themselves. It would be like a hooker campaigning for chastity.
SF are no better - haven't they been known to shoot opponents? Get real, people.
How can you call for an alliance with the Socialist Party when they are Pro Loyalist?
Maybe because they obviously aren't "Pro-Loyalist"?
Jim Monaghan: Always get vaguely surprised when I see that name, as if you've escaped from La Modelo or something. I accept a great deal of what you're saying but I honestly don't see what we could have done differently in terms of our approach to the Northern Executive. I've asked this a number of times in relation to the PFI debate and never got any serious answer beyond: 'You should have left the Assembly and started a broad front campaign against privatisation' which frankly sounds about as juvenile as politics can get. We're in the Executive but I don't see us as having a lot of choice in the matter. In the South of course it is a different matter, there the obligation to keep the Peace Process going is hardly existing. But we have no plans to go into coalition, despite the fact that we were told several times during the election campaign that we were simply waiting for the word from FF to go into coalition with them. Personally, I'm ideologically opposed to it but even if we did away with idology and looked at it simply from a tactical point of view it would be stupid for SF to go into coalition for at least a decade.
Chekov: Indeed, it does prove the Anarchist point to a certain extent, but only in terms of the oepration of an Assembly that can be shut down at the whim of the British Government. For example, the Southern state has never removed the right of people to vote because they didn't like the result that was going to come out. The thing I would be concerned about here is that all the people voted for this in the Good Friday Agreement referendum, and as far as I understand Anarchism, you accept the legitimacy of popular votes on referendums. Here we have the British Government setting aside the democratic wish of the people of this island as expressed in the GFA. Surely that, whatever about the Assembly which personally I can take or leave, is the issue.
So why do the SP say Orange Parades should be allowed into areas where they are not wanted?
Does every thread have to descend into SP-bashing? It's all very well to criticise their politics, but why not keep it to threads that are vaguely relevant? I mean there are several well-established recent thread which are concentrating on this noble endeavour ;-] Every political group has a position or record on most issues so if we were to follow the line of some people here, every single thread on the newswire would immediately end up with slagging off of the various political parties. There's hardly too much point in that.
I should aslo add that all the simplistic caricatures of their positions on the North ('pro-loyalist') actually takes away from the valid criticisms of their positions, since it makes it easy for them to brush it all off as lunatic rantings. In particular impersonating their members and posting under their names is counter-productive.
Justin: There are lots of ways that the state, can apply pressure to ensure the 'right result' in elections. Fair enough there is a specific ability to do this in the north (the subservience to the British government) but there are other means elsewhere, the army and financial system spring to mind. Mature democracies are mature because they don't need these devices so much, but this is because the people have learned their place: an acceptance that the status quo will persist. If the state thinks that the electorate won't obey they'll do their damndest to stop the election whether by cancelling elections, coups, capital flight or whatever means. Sure these can be opposed, and the state can be defeated, but if you have the strength on the street to defeat the state, what is the point in directing that strength towards incorporating yourself in this sham of democracy?
Regarding referendums, anarchists acknowledge that it can, in some cases, be a worthwhile exercise to vote in referendums, however it is a bridge too far to say that we recognise them as especially 'legitimate'. The powers that be decide what you get to vote on and the choices are normally restricted to yes or no. Hardly that much of a choice. For what it's worth the WSM advocated an abstention in the GFA vote, while calling for a ceasefire regardless, as we saw the vote as a choice between sectarian peace and sectarian war - ie not much of a choice.
Really. The Assembly is what you'll take. SF have been honest in their desperation to get in there. And their record has been a disgrace. The point about PFI is that they accept market forces and have no alternative to the Thatcherite/Blairite model - singing from the sheet of acceptable government. Appearing at the WTO, alliances with multinational heads from the USA.
The biggest problem though is that every issue in the Assembly comes down to communal politics. You have no answer to sectarianism because you reflect and reinforce the divisions. Your parties nationalism will always drive you to make coalitions with anybody who will benefit from a single capitalist entity. The only losers are workers. Protestant workers are not even in the ball park, catholic ones will suffer into keeping alliances with rich nationalists. If the ANC can do it from a position of strength, SF can only follow. How many unpalatable actions by the leadership does it take for you to question the base of you politics that puts nationalism before class?
Irony is dead: Sinn Fein can be contacted at 8726100, ring them and ask for a copy of our policy document on PFI/PPP. Then read it. Then come back to me.
The way the Assembly is structured is to weaken the Unionist veto to allow for the Nationalist minority to have a say in the governance of the island.
The Assembly is not perfect, I could sit down and list more problems than you can possibly imagine. The Agreement is not perfect, it's not even republican, I probably have more difficulties with it than you. But they were the compromises necessary to reach a stage where people were not being killed and where peaceful movement forward is possible.
The rest of it is the usual anti-shinner screed I'm not even going to bother responding to.
Chekov: I accept the ability of the State through the elements you outline, and especially I would suggest through the media to ensure the 'right' result in the election. The point about strength on the street is well taken, my response is that the republican movement does not have sufficent strength on the street. Neither does any so-called revolutionary movement in Ireland. Our analysis was that we needed to build political strength, not electoral, political. But electoral strength is a key factor in this and the portion of our political strength we have succeeded in building the best, though we are advancing in other areas too.
Well done folks. apart from the usual mad bigot shite attacks on the sp this is a real and important discussion on real issues. Good stuff indymedia.
has been carried out of Madrid's sq
You post with SF after your name. I'm addressing you as a member of that organisation. I don't need to read a document from a party that imposes the thing. I suffer under PFI - the schools in which I and my colleagues work are being privatised brick by bloody brick. Take Wellington College - the building firms' are raking in billions from the cheap land in a prime site. In the school the private firm who run the admin will not allow chairs to be moved from one classroom to another without written permission. The school is on less than 1/3 of the ground of the old one, the corridors are too narrow, there are now traffic problems around the area which will get worse when the new houses are occupied. Who benefits? Well Cement Roadstone Holdings do - the company who gave thousands to FF thru Ansbacher (are there any backhanders going to the minister who handed it over to these parasites). Well that's one schools problems and I could list so much more. I have heard similar tales from other PFI projects. Now Justin - is that the sort of info I'll get in the SF policy document on PFI?
That crap about 'well at least the killings stopped' hides a million sins - you could get away with anything using that logic and in doing so lose every principle on the way. But you leave sectarianism and its structures in tact and allow the British Govt to appear as a progressive force.
Finally the Unionist veto - the civil rights movement ended that 30 years ago. Don't you dare claim that the armed struggle followed by SF wielding PFI in one hand and the Programme for Govt in the other has brought about any victory for anybody. There is one thing defending the rights of republicans to oppose a sectarian state. But don't kid yourself - the path you're on is a well tred one by republicans. It only ends in the FF school of economics and politics. And you know it.
But I have sat and wondered at the galling insensitivity of a lower ranking officer of the CCOO trade union apparatus who with out any tact or hint of manners confirmed that the CCOO was not in the position to help her achieve redress before the August monthly holiday of 2002. To date the company involved which recieved over an eight year period 20,million€ in gov. funding has not paid its workers.
That woman now has a child, she was heavily pregnant at the time, the notaries of the CCOO and its staff, could not help her as the company had not registered her as a legal employee.
That company is now closed.
Maybe he should have not gone out today.
Mayday. forget nothing.
the brits have pulled the plug on democracy in the the 'six counties' , for the simple reason that their manufactured state, exists Solely to serve unionist interests.
The brits underestimated the unwillingness of the unionist political make up to change. (This includes security forces, paramilitary and political leaders ). This is evident in the past few years through unionist paramilitary violence and constant stalling in the political process. They have cleary misunderstood
the GFA and could not sell it to their own communities.
Somehow its not a slogan I want to chant.
When the assmebly was set up a significant criticism was it's anti-democratic nature - with the entrenched communal divisions there was no way envisioned to 'vote out the government'.
Now that the elections looked like they might actually end up with a change of government (the dream team of DUP / SF coalition for first and deputy) the elections were cancelled.
SF's arguments about their responsibility to the peace process put them firmly in the Irish mould of believing politics is who will 'manage' better, rather than presenting real, alternative ideologies or philosophies for us to choose between. Surely there is a danger Justin, in your party acting as a wing of the establishment in the North: a danger that we might not believe in your radical credentials in the south. This would be a disservice to the many southern members who join SF not because it is the 'largest nationalist party' or even because of it's role in the, now respectable, war. They joined it becuase of it's supposed 'revolutionary flavour' , it's radicalism on social as well as constitutional issues.
Stopping the elections is wrong - but it doesn't make any real difference does it? What policies will change, what would people actually vote for?
SF seem rightly annoyed at the moment - but there is the suspicion that this might have more to do with jobs and money and status for the party - since by their own admission they can't actually implement any of their policies in the north.
Irony is dead: Tell me, because I'm curious, as to why I should bother to answer some-one who can't be bothered to actually listen to our alternative? As stated before, fuck off, read the document, educate yourself, come back to me.
seedot: Our annoyance stems a lot more from the denial of the right of Irish people to express their preference at the ballot box by a foreign Government than jobs, money or status. Sinn Fein MLAs take only the average industrial wage so it's not as if they're motivated by money n the Assembly. I agree that the danger you speak of exists, and I also agree that implementing our policies in the Six is a lot more difficult, but we still have had some successes such as removing the 11 Plus, dramatically increasing investment in integrated education etc. Increased support for SF would be tantamount to increased support for more powers for the Assembly, something the Joint Declaration makes clear can be delivered in justice and policing. The stronger we are, the strgoner a voice for republican socialism there is.
'Why should I be bothered to answer some one who cannot be bothered to listen to our alternative?
Because thousands of working class people do not need to read the alternative that has seen the Sinn Fein ministers of health and education first praising PFI in the local media then implementing it which has resulted in closures job losses and much more. I have read many of your comments in the past many of which I would agree with but to resort to the debating arena of 'fuck off and go educate yourself' is disapointing to say the least. It would make readers think that'Irony is dead' touched on a really sore point?
You may have recently now produced a document about PFI and how much you might be against it, but the proof is in the eating. You can curse and attempt to patronise those who raise a genuine question but the reality in Northern Ireland has seen Sinn Fein ministers first praising then implementing PFI while closing hospitals and schools. When those whom this effects speak up about this I would have expected a genuine answer and discussion from Justin as I know of many republicans who are prepared to engage in debate without resorting to the politics of Fuck of.
While the constant intrusion of SP baiting on every thread is tiring it should not be surprising. In this case, the SP have been described as Pro-Loyalist. Given that the SP are quick to describe people as Nationalist or Anti-Protestant if you disagree with the SPs Northern Line, then sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
If you slander then you will be slandered back.
The unwillingness of the SP to evade answering the tough questions also causes spillover into other threads.
eg:
*They still havent said why John Throne was denied the right of appeal to the CWI World Congress.
* Why did the SP leadership lie to Oisin Kelly and others about how Militant lost control of Labour Youth?
"Always get vaguely surprised when I see that name, as if you've escaped from La Modelo or something"
There is more than one Jim Monaghan. I know and have a great deal of respect for the better known one.Met him first in 1972.He is one of the Provo militants who have created the base of support in the South by hard work and dedication. Hopefully he gets out one way or another. Behind his captors is the American Gov. Effectively Jim and his comrades are hostages. Will write on the issues in question later.
Jim Monaghan
(The less well known)
Magneto is Paul Dillon.
It is clear from what he writes. His anti-militant obsession and his nationalism.
Justin Moran:
"the Southern state has never removed the right of people to vote because they didn't like the result that was going to come out"
Nah, they use different tactics down there (see Nice treaty referendum)...
Irony is Dead did indeed hit a sore point. A very sore point, but not the one you're thinking of.
He basically stated that he disagreed with Sinn Fein policy on PFI, fair enough, he then stated when I suggested he read our policy on PFI that basically, he couldn't be bothered.
I have often criticised the SP's policy on the North. But I've read their policy documents on it so I know exactly what they're saying. I have no time, no time at all, for people who deliberately choose not to inform themselves.
Since Indymedia was set up I have debated PFI so many times with so many different people I am, quite frankly, sick and tired of repeating myself. Especially as people are criticising our policy on PFI/PPP without even knowing what it is. I am not ducking the issue, I have debated it more times than I care to remember, I even had a FAQ done up at one stage. Now, frankly, I am going to simply direct people to our policy document which i will be more than happy to send on.
So, to sum up, if people want to criticise PFI that's great. If they want to criticise Sinn Fein's role in PFI, that's fine too. If they want to debate Sinn Fein's attitude to PFI/PPP with me they can, pardon my use of the vernacular, fuck off and find out what Sinn Fein's policy is before coming back to me about it. If they want to state in supreme arrogance that they can't be bothered reading our policy but want to debate it anyway withoout knowing whats in it, they are more than welcome to do so. They just won't be debating it with me.
Sin e.
Read our policy on PFI? Justin you really don't get it do you. A document can be written in isolation to practical reality. Blair (and Bush) have hundreds of policy documents - they probably have one to say the weather is much better under their regimes. SF can state massive opposition in their material to PFI but what they do in practice is what reveals so much - and causes the anger. Each year the Labour Party at conference voted for unilateral nuclear disarmament, documents were written, letters put out, canvasses told the public faithfully. Every time in govt, every single time, they said well in power things are different. This is the road of capitalist parties - on paper nobody cuts wages, starts war, closes hospitals, privatises. In power they all do it. SF have shown they are content with this method. Republican socialism my arse. Delivered with the grace of rich americans, Irish business leaders, and Blairs govt I suppose.
Sadly, but predictably, many of the posts on this topic have ignored my questions which was based on what level of activism could be expected from the left on this Island in protest to the cancellation by a State of scheduled democractic elections.
This state is the same one that was condemned by these same posters as colonial and imperialist for its role in the invasion of Iraq.
When i ask what are we going to do about it, instead fo addressing the fundamental question, SF and its policies are put under the microscope.
SF is not the issue here, nor are PFI, bin charges in Sligo or any other sin percieved to have been committed by republicans in its recent political history.
The irony is that, deflecting the question of the legitimacy of the British government actions on to the policy and practices of SF is EXACTLY the same tactic that was used by the pro war lobby during the iraq war.
Meaning that when anti-war activists had a warmonger on TV or radio they would deflect the question of the war onto the evils of Saddam.
The posts here deflect the question of British Governments actions onto the evils of SF and its socialism.
So I take it that the SP and WSM, at a minimum, will not to be anything to assit their fellow workers in the north excercise their democratic right.
Pathetic, really.
For another example.
Irony is dead's organisation gave out lots of leaflets calling for civil disobediance and even direct action against the war and refuelling at Shannon. But when push came to shove they either did what they could to undermine such actions or they held fake actions where they had quietly struck a deal with the Gardai. It's not just SF that likes to say one thing and do another in other words.
Killian in terms of the anarchists your demanding we do something to protest something we are on record as opposing. On two levels in fact
1. We don't think parliamentary democracy has anything to do with democracy. See http://struggle.ws/once/pd_intro.html to find out why in detail.
2. We think the 'peace process' just serves to deepen and entrench sectarianism (the current crisis is an example of why. See http://struggle.ws/wsm/peaceprocess.html to find out why in detail. Note also that we have always seperated the ceasefires (which we support) from the 'peace process'.
In certain circumstances (ie the ending of a dictatorship) anarchists have fought for fairer parliamentary elections because we recognise these are part of winning greater freedoms. Demanding the restoration of Stormont does not seem to me to be a comparable situation. So while I'd be happy enough to use it as yet another example of why parlaimentary democracy is fake but I don't think it's worth marching for.
Incidentally the same sort of thing HAS happened in the south. The last local elections were delayed for years because of the fear that bin charges would have meant a lot of independent candidates getting elected.
I think that I did my best to explain why anarchists don't think it is worthwhile to fight for a sham democracy. I don't think that this counts as 'ignoring' your question. Maybe you don't agree with our point of view with regards to what is worth fighting for, but I don't think it's fair to say that we are diverting the question onto sinn fein, as you state.
Andrew and Chekov - valid points that I accept regarding the stormont assembly and, to a lesser extent, 'democracy'.
However, and firstly may I point out that I, and all republicians I know, are not fighting or particulary want the return of stormont - but its what we are dealing with at the moment and what was available to advance our view and our struggle presently.
As youas more than aware republicians have undertaken different tactics and stratedgies in their struggle for meaningful, lasting change. Yoou don't have to support some of the tactics, nor would i expect people to, but understand that SF has not somehow gone from being a political party that being a member of was...well lets say not exactly advantageous in either parts of the Island, to a bunch of caerists overnight.
The point is that stormont is the here and now of politics in the six counties, SF has agreed to come on board make an effort to seek agreement to create the space neccessary to ensure that violent expression, of whatver kind or source, is not the way that the political process is implemented.
The extremely high turnout and engagemnet of the electorate in the six counties and the relatively low level of enagement in other form of political mobilisation ie outside of party political strutures strongly suggests that the vast majority of the adult population agrees with and supports the option of what you may cal 'democratic' elections.
Rightly or wrongly this is what we have, the north is trying to pull its way out of conflict and to be honest I think that all broadminded, decent meaning, concerned citizens of this Island need to recognise that we all have a part to play to promote the pernament end of violence and threat as a instrument of politics.
I know that the members of WSM, SP, SWP, Greens and other left organistaions are broadmined, decent meaning, and concerned citizens. We (the left) can have the neccessary debates and discusions after we have got the basics covered.
Those basics are the goal of disarmament by all, a representaive police and regular and scheduled elections. Basically the decks have to be cleared of guns and threats, people have to feel safe and comfortable and then we will be able to move forward.
The canceling of elections, the concept of which you make disagree with, in a administration that I don't particularly care much for is what we have and need at the moment.
My belief is that the broad left on the island has, becuase of the difficulty in reconciling parts of the conflict with their own personal identity, history, eductaion and background, effectively taken and drawn up compromise positions that are not in anyway reflective of reality and therefore have founf themselves in a position that they can excuse their inactivity on the north by knowing that their postion is, firstly, a populist fudge designed to offend the least amount of people and secondly, so removed from the reality of the situation that it is unimplementable and will never be tested.
I suppose the main differnce, because I presume we globally are looking at the same ideal, is that republians are looking at our struggle in an increasingly pragmatic and grounded manner and other on the left are still looking at the conflict with an ear on the ground and an eye in the library.
What do anarchists offer in place of the reprsentative democracy they want people to dismiss?
The system they envision would be without an elected, accountable, formal leadership, but would develop an unelected, informal, and unaccountable leadership. And I don't see how the mass-meetings for decision-making would be democratic. Unless they lasted for days or weeks, how would everyone be able to speak? More likely they would be dominated by those who are loudest, most assertive, and best at political maneuvering. The consensus model used by anarchists is hardly democratic, as it gives a veto to even tiny (political) minorities over vast majorities.
Also, without some kind of relatively centralized political and administrative body, how would a national health plan work? How would railroads work?
I don't think anarchism is a very good alternative to capitalism, but that isn't really what I wanted to say here.
How would the anarchist position help in regards to the suspension of elections? Ignoring this undemocratic move as if it's insignificant won't change anything. In fact, Blair would be happy if we just ignored it. Ignoring it won't get the Brits out, won't stop the UDA, won't increase people's wages, won't do nothing.
This move by Blair is much less an indictment of representative democracy as it is of imperialism (British and otherwise), New Labour, Ahern, and Bush. That's where we should focus, not on using it as an opportunistic tool to promote a politics that will have no positive impact on the working-class and Nationalists.
Also, as regards PFI...
I too have been disapointed by the actions of McGuiness and deBruin, but I think we need to remember a few things:
1. After a couple years or so, the backlash within SF seems to have pushed the leadership to closely examine this and committ itself to finding ways to avoid PFI in the future. Not long ago there was an article in AP/RN about a meeting where this was discussed.
2. Engagement in the Assembly was seen as an important way of creating dialogue with unionists and others and demonstrating that SF was very willing to work with them. It was also neccessary to run the cross-border bodies.
3. As pointed out earlier, the Assembly had no tax-raising powers. If it did, I'm pretty sure SF would have supported raising taxes to support public services.
4. McGuiness SHOULD be given credit for getting rid of the 11+ and increasing the availability of integrated education.
Tom
(an American socialist, hope no one minds me poking my head in here)
I do not wish to be unfair to SF but it is impossible to accept that their time in the assembly has been well spent.
SF MLAs voted on mass to oppose justice for low paid term time workers.
SF implemented a programme of PPP/PFI in education which has already led to job losses and cash crisis for schools.
To be fair SF now that they are out of power seem to have changed their position of PPP.
SF role in health has been to lead the service into a crisis including, undermining of rural hospitals, means testing and a waiting list crisis.
At no time during the life of the assemble did SF stand out as a party calling for increased public service spending.
The 11+ has not been effectivly replaced. The main option is a class based system.
I find it hard to imaging that SF themselves would stand over their time as asembly ministers as a great sucess on social and economic issues in fact I understand that there is considerable debate within the republican movement on these issues.
The state and the rest of the bourgeois apparatus use a variety of means to preserve the status quo besides the usual repression. Cooption is a favoured and less upsetting way.
The deprived communities of Dublin are littered with former activists who are now state employees who once would have shouted down government ministers and who now are on first name terms as they plead for funding to preserve their own patronage networks. On a grander scale this is what the revived Stormont represents. More than a "community" partnership less than a real government.
In dropping some of the baggage on Republican ideology such as absentionism the republican movemment has left itself open to ideas like coalitions and other such things under the guise of "real politics" which in essence will lead to an acceptance of the status quo. This in practice is the practice of the Labour Party and their ilk. All tghat can be done is administer Capitalism and try and minimise it's worst effects. "If we don't close down one hospital now they will make us close down two later". "Our ministers will be so much more efficient than the other lot that we will all be much better off". Funnily while I disagree with entering coalition in the revived Stormont I am for attending Westminister and doing a Bernadette Devlin from time to time.
They are trying to seduce Sinn Fein with the prospect or semblance of power. Vincent Browne said this in a recent column in the Sunday Business Post. One Sinn Fein councillor gort upset about this and sounded like Eoghan Harris in the old stickies in his outrage. ( Harris regarded all attempts to defend the National struggle as a Provo Trot conspiracy.) When latter day supporters of section 31 are now your best friends in the media maybe you should worry about the drift.
The game of the northern statelet administration (It is not a government, Governments raise taxs at least) is to make a barrier between those making the cuts and those being cut. Oh, I can hear Blair or his minister referring questions on cutbacks to the relevant administrator in Stormont. Of course the budget which is set in Westminister is the decisive thing.
Fast forward to the next election down here. I suspect that the Greens have already made a deal with Kenny for a ministry or two such is the hunger for a merc of the decisive TDs.Both sides will do a similar deal with Sinn Fein if they have too. ( They would prefer not to as you are not quite house trained yet and from my point of view I hope you are never house trained).
Sean McBride destroyed Clann na Phoblachta in the fifties and caused the destruction of a generation of idealists. The Labour Paryty successive successful struggles with it's conscience has done the same for generations.
What Ireland needs is not charity for the poor and deprived but a restructuring of society. Sin Fein has in its ranks the best and the brightest ( and the bravest) of this generation, the Greens have a good deal of the rest, way behind them are the rest of the left, that is why it is so important that neither cause the destruction of the hopes of this generation.
On the 11 plus, so is the education system in the South all that great where there is none. It produces a large proportion of young people who ahve attended school from 4 to 16 who cannot read or write to a sufficient level. By all means take the pressure of the young people but make sure the system delivers. It is not delivering especially to the poor down here
Nope,I'm not Dillon. Try again.
Killian,
The Good Friday agreement left the "struggle" in a win win situation for all sides concerned. Sinn Fein claimed they had won because the institutions established were such that they would facilitate a move to a united Ireland, while the PUP and UUP claimed victory because the agreement secured the union.
In otherwords it institutionalised sectarianism. Sinn Fein would get ministerial positions, PUP would get seats (irrespective of their vote) the UUP would get Ministerial seats as would the DUP.
This situation could not continue forever. Socialists will not support Sinn Fein to campaign for these sectarian institutions whereby 110 AMs are paid 50,000plus to do nothing but use there position to stamp their mark in areas maintaining the sectarian situation.
We are in favour of democracy, but the current stalemate where the Unionist, teh UK and Irish governments are demanding that IRA decommission in order for Sinn Fein to participate in the assembly was an inevitable follow on from the Good Friday agreement.
Even if Sinn Fein were allowed back into the Assembly, would they still hold the position that despite being a minority party that they should control ministerial positions.