SWP versus Derwin - the saga continues

by :-) Sat Nov 15, 2003 13:47

Andorra indymedia has put together a site to vote in the catalan presidential elections tomorrow: http://www.votaminutil.org/

by Interested Sat Nov 15, 2003 14:34

if Delaney got a nomination yesterday or not?

by Anonymous Sat Nov 15, 2003 15:29

In case anyone missed the big debate on this issue it is still on the front page if you scroll down, or go to:-

http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=61823&PHPSESSID=51de673af0998557236caa0b3a9092db

This debate has attracted some 130 comments - which is a record on Indymedia Ireland to my knowledge - and is still on-going.

Des Derwin only made an additional comment a few days ago, referring to the above nominations - which he entitles "Super Tuesday".

by freaky dee Sat Nov 15, 2003 18:25

Who's the guy on the poster? I would trust him to get my dog run down

by Trade Unionist - and Socialist Sat Nov 15, 2003 20:56

Hi Des

I'm not in SIPTU but I would like to help you in the campaign. How can I get involved?

by The Insider Sun Nov 16, 2003 13:02

The biggest discussion on indymedia revolves around inter-left bickering and infighting.

With enemies like this, the Government, and their friends in the SIPTU hierarchy, doesn't need any friends.

by Another Anonymous SWPer - Front of the Month Mon Nov 17, 2003 00:49

The SWP pulls a cynical sectarian stunt that risks causing real damage to the left in SIPTU. Our anonymous SWP friend then argues that those who complain about the sectarian stunt are giving comfort to the government and SIPTU leadership up.

Typical

by Den Bailey Mon Nov 17, 2003 02:29

An anonymous troll accuses someone of being SWP because he doesn't share the troll's prejudices. This issue has been argued out elsewhere but the bickering continues and anyone who suggests that the most popular topic on Indymedia -- Lefties slagging one another -- is a lot of old wank, is accused of being swp. No evidence is necessary of course. Any anonymous tosser can say anything. Do you think anyone takes you seriously?

by The insider Mon Nov 17, 2003 11:46

Sorry matey, just a non party leftie who's looking on in disgust.

by Steelie Mon Nov 17, 2003 11:52

The rank sectarianism, back stabbing and opportunism of the SWP?

Or the fact that some people have the cheek to complain about it?

by The Insider Mon Nov 17, 2003 12:05

....and also the fact that this is the latest in a long line of intra-left bickering. Look at the bin tax campaign - the SP and the SWP spend as much time fighting each other as they spend fighting the council!

The vast majority of working class are probably wondering how they tell each other apart. SP? SWP? What's the difference?

by googoo Mon Nov 17, 2003 12:28

No, a vast majority of working class people know who the SP are, they just then wonder whether the SWP are the same party or a split from the workers party.

by Steelie Mon Nov 17, 2003 12:41

I'd say that the vast majority of people couldn't distinguish between the SP and SWP, except perhaps in certain areas of Fingal.

Personally, I don't like either but I can recognise that the real block to them unifying is the fact that the SWP appear to be so deeply sectarian that they will fuck over any allies at the drop of a hat if they think they can get some short-term advantage out of it.

When it comes to bickering, we see lots of complaints on indymedia that the Irish left doesn't spend enough time fighting the enemy and too much time fighting each other. Probably true, but you should remember that these bicker-wars normally spring up when somebody _is_ actually doing something and gets stabbed in the back by a group (nearly always the SWP). This particular war erupted as a consequence of Des Derwin trying to build a campaign in SIPTU. The minor bickerings on indymedia during the bin tax campaign were focused on the fact that the SWP were trying to hold back the campaign from blockades. Recall that, despite some strong disagreements in private, we never saw any bickering between the SP/ISN/WCA/WSM over the bin tax on indymedia. If we cast our mind back to the mother of all bicker-wars, around March 1st, we will also remember that the spark to this was GNAW organising a protest in Shannon.

The moral of the story is that, although there is lots of bickering here, most of it is actually because people are trying to do things, not just sitting around and moaning.

by Irnbrew Mon Nov 17, 2003 15:23

Since when was openly arguing that continual blockades in areas where there was continued collection of non-payers' bins is an inappropriate tactic, a stab in the back?
It is possible to disagree. It is desirable to argue your corner. But it's a bit strong -- but wholly in the best traditions of comments on Indymedia -- to describe people expressing a different tactic as "stabbing the left in the back".
By the way the continual blockades seem to have been quietly dropped. On Steelie's reckoning it looks like you've stabbed yourself in the back.

by Steelie Mon Nov 17, 2003 15:55

"Since when was openly arguing that continual blockades in areas where there was continued collection of non-payers' bins is an inappropriate tactic, a stab in the back?"

Since never. But that's not the problem. The problem is organising meetings where the only campaign representatives present argue against blockades, despite the fact that the majority position in the campaign was that activists should be pushing solidarity blockades where possible. That's what the SWP did. They went along to campaign activist meetings, argued their point, lost and then went out and ignored the campaign decisions. They did not act as part of the campaign, they acted as the SWP and damned if they were going to do anything that they didn't want to.

Whenever the campaign decided to hold blockades the SWP certainly argued against it, but when they lost, as they invariably did (except where they totally controlled the campaign as in DL) they just ignored the decisions and didn't take part.

The blockade tactic has not been quietly ditched. It has been noisily defeated. In part this is down to the SWP pretending to be part of the campaign when it suited them, but splitting our forces by not participating in anything that the campaign decided to do unless it was exactly in line with the position of their leadership. It is very difficult for a campaign to take effective action when parts of it just ignore decisions that they don't agree with.

by Nominator Mon Nov 17, 2003 18:47

Can anyone tell us if Delaney actually got a nomination?

by Amused Mon Nov 17, 2003 20:01

Steelies arguing for a democratic centralist position in the campaign - are you a leninist? Are just a hypocrite?

by Irnbrew Mon Nov 17, 2003 22:27

Steelie should get out more. At the mass meetings I was at the view was held by the great majority that where all bins were being collected routine or repetitive blckades of depots were not called for. The SWP people I saw agreed with that but argued for -- and helped organise -- blockades during the height of the jailings. They were there -- even at blockades that they felt uneasy about... What was conspicuous by their absence were the ordinary supporters of the campaign. Whatever the call from on high, they voted with their feet. So it looks like the terrible swp was more in tune with feeling on the ground on this tactic than those throwing "stab in the back" allegations around.
Also don't know where you get the idea that Ballyfermot is a ficticious campaign. 400 people marching through the area is pretty good for a "ficticious" campaign group.

by irnbrew Mon Nov 17, 2003 22:36

Steelie says:-
"Recall that, despite some strong disagreements in private, we never saw any bickering between the SP/ISN/WCA/WSM over the bin tax on indymedia"

But the usual excuse for hurling abuse around Indymedia is that strong argument is healthy.
You now seem to think that differences over tactics between different activists should be kept "private" away from the ears of the great unwashed.

My view would be that arguing the pros and cons of a tactic or a strategy is fine but name calling and slander is not.

As I recall it the SWP openly argued their opinion on these tactics. I don't recall them descending to the slander and point scoring that characterised Steelie's consuggesting that anyone who argued differentlt was an enemy of the working class or stabbing the movement in the back.

As I say Steelie should get out more.

by Martin Mon Nov 17, 2003 22:43

The SWP's attitude to blockades has been disgusting.

They said were in favour of blockades in areas where full non-collection was in force, but that's was a theoretical view as they played very almost no role in those blockades.

They tried their best to undercut solidarity blockades elsewhere and when they lost votes they just didn't show up. Following the decisions of the majority is for other people you see.

Then non-collection gets rolled out in a peacemeal fashion into places like Dun Laoghaire / Rathdown and South Dublin and the SWP who had been arguing that while they were against solidarity action they would be right there on the ground when non-collection arrived go entirely missing.

The SWP like to go on about other people "failing the test of the anti-capitalist movement". I respectfully submit that the SWP have failed the test of the anti-bin tax movement.

by me Tue Nov 18, 2003 00:46

Soooo whats happening in SIPTU then??