Labour Youth adopt Starry Plough

by Non-trot Thu Dec 11, 2003 18:13

Although I share your wish for tintin, I wish that one day you join an organisation or take part in the formation of an entity that is really socialist.

by AK Thu Dec 11, 2003 18:10

You should check out this
http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?story_id=62630&condense_comments=false#comment55888

by Magneto Thu Dec 11, 2003 17:58

Why dont you defend the SPs pro loyalist policies, their support for the cops in Evian and Shannon, do you want me to go on? Do you think this is getting either of us anywhere?

I hope some day you escape from the cult and are restored to sanity.

by tintin Wed Dec 10, 2003 21:21

Why don't you comment on you party's positon regarding the state, Shannon, Social partnership, the Nice treaty, Bin tax, USI, tax amnesties?

You are a member of the Labour Party why are you not defending party policy?

by Magneto Wed Dec 10, 2003 21:18

The views of the people you mention are ell known. Your lies fool no one. Especially those about John Throne. Go on give him his appeal. Now leave me alone. If you want me to perform on demand then I will demand a fee.

by Where's Magneto?? Wed Dec 10, 2003 21:05

We are all waiting your reply.

We know you are still around.

by Where's Magneto gone? Tue Dec 09, 2003 16:14

Magneto we are all waiting for your reply

by Anti-Magneto Tue Dec 09, 2003 00:21

Magneto as per usual you talk a lot of nonsense. Just a few factual corrections on your statements.
Denis Tourish, Finn Geaney, Dermot Connolly, Marc Mulholland, Bill Webster, some members from Pakistan, South Africa and Scotland all left the CWI voluntarily - they were not expelled.
John Throne did have the right to appeal, he didn't show up.

by Troll watcher Sun Dec 07, 2003 18:59

tintin is probally the same troll who claimed on another thread that the IRSP were not there either. Don't feed.

by How? Sun Dec 07, 2003 18:53

How would you know if someone was from the Labour Party or not? Can you automatically detect the party allegiances of everyone you see?
How are we to know that YOU yourself were even there?

by tintin Sun Dec 07, 2003 18:38

Magneto,
I noticed that there were NO MEMBERS of the Labour Party in Shannon on Dec 6th.

Why not?

by Paddy Fri Dec 05, 2003 20:34

As Magneto points out people in the Labour Party have different views on different issues and freely express them, as opposed to most Leninist parties where dissenting views lead to either expulsion or marginalisation.

The problem with Magnetos position is that he just stops dead with that proposition: that there's freedom of expression in the Labour Party. Of course you can be anti-bin tax, anti-war, etc etc and be in the Labour Party, but when it comes to practice Labour does the opposite as a party. This is why Magneto can't answer the questions being put to him about the LPs position other than by pointing out the personal positions of a minority of members.

When it comes to practise, the LP has played an extremely negative role in the whole Bin tax affair, with its leader and TU leadership attacking the campaign. Labour activists have played no role in the campaign., in fact in Dublin they are running scared of it fearing that it will undermine their local election chances.

I have clashed with Magneto before on this and his tactics seem to be unvarying: respond to any criticism of Labour by attacking the leninists of the SP. Any serious socialist knows the nature of so-called democratic centralism but equally the terrible record of social democracy in betraying the working class.

So to Magneto and any other serious socialists in Labour stop waisting your time in a Blairite outfit which will inevitably go into coalition with a right wing party and leave you all disillusioned. And no it does'nt mean that you should subject yourself to the misery of joining the SWP/SP you could decide to play a positive role in the creation of a new broad party of the working class. This process is occuring in many countries, including Scotland, France, portugal etc. and people like you from the left of the social democratic tradition have played a constructive role.

Give up your oul' illlusions and make the break!

by tintin Fri Dec 05, 2003 16:07

Imperialism and capitalism does at certian periods does breed fascism. But this does not mean that all forms of capitalism is fascist. FF/FG/PD etc are capitalist parties but they are not fascist. They don't want to smash all forms democracy, they don't deny the holocaust or praise hitler. They should have the right to organise, stand in elections and be allowed to freely associate. This goes for the OO, they are not fascist, so they should be allowed have democratic rights.

by a guy called satan Fri Dec 05, 2003 15:30

The differences between fascism and orangism are not absolute The OO is a pro imperialist organization . Imperialism pre dates fascism ;it gives rise to fascism at "home " when faced with defeats a\broad. Fascism is the imposition of colonial / imperialist methods of repression on the people of a colonizing country.

by tintin Fri Dec 05, 2003 14:29

I am not saying that the AOH are the SAME as the OO. They are seperate organisations they have a different composition and have a different ideology. But nevertheless they are a right wing bigoted christian organisation as are the OO.

i am not saying that they are linked to SF or the IRA.

The AOH are very right wing, it seems you wont acknowledge this? Look at their banning of Homosexuals from the ST patricks Day parade in New York. Hardly the actions of a progressive organisation.

My point is that the OO are a right wing organisation not a fascist one. tthe difference is a crucial and important one.

by matt Fri Dec 05, 2003 14:19

As I have said I have no time for the AOH but to equate it with the Orange Order is absurd. The AOH may be Catholic but it is not agressively sectarian in the way the Order is. Does it impose itself on Protestant communites? Does it ban members who have social contact with Protestants? Does it encourage sectarian attacks on Protestants? Have thousands of its members gone to prison for murdering or attempting to murder Protestants? Has it ever been the secret society controlling a one party state and its police force? (That was NI 1922 to 1972 before you ask). Hardly. And in anticipation of your next puerile comment, the AOH has no association with the republican movment and I would safely say that few if any of its members have ever been in prison for IRA activities. In fact historically it has been associated with moderate middle class nationalism - the Irish Party/Nationalist Party, and SDLP. Learn some history before attempting to apply your "scientific socialism" to the poorly digested scraps you remember from whatever trot rag you read.

by tintin Fri Dec 05, 2003 13:04

We both agree that the OO is a sectarian right wing organisation. The AOH is equally as right wing and sectarian as the OO but because of their relativly small size they have less influence and impact in society. I would not call either the AOH or OO fascist. It is a very important distinction. I believe that fascists should not have the right to organise and should not have the right to freedom of speech or association. The OO are not fascist, they are right wing. Where do you propose to draw the line of fascism? Is FF or FG fascist? Should FF or FG be allowed to organise?

I am not equating the Rastas with the BNP. I am making a clear distinction between right wing and fascist. You are the one that is unclear in classification, I could say to you that you are claiming FG, FF or Labour to be fascist just because they are right wing.

by matt Fri Dec 05, 2003 12:43

If the Orange Order were based in any other country besides Ireland people like you would be organising protests and crying crocodile tears about them. The entire ethos of Orangeism is ethnic and sectarian hatred and suppression of Irish nationalists. It is an ideology that has been responsible for two centuries of murder and torture and anti-democratic suppression of anything that threatens it. It is as much or as little fascist as the Ku Klux Klan or the Broederbond. Do they fit with your infantile notions of what constitutes fascism? Not that it matters a fiddlers fart, because you don't have to fit all the criteria you mention to be a nasty reactionary murderous organisation that has been a stain on the history of this island for over 200 years. And don't try and compare them to the AOH - an organisation for which I have no time myself - because there is no comparison. You might as well equate the BNP and the rastarfarian movement.

by tintin Fri Dec 05, 2003 00:44

The Orange Order are quite different to the Fascist BNP. The OO like the BNP are bigots and reactionaries but they are NOT fascists. Fascist is a distinct and precise term that can't be simply slapped on any right wing organisation.

But the OO do not have the expressed wish to smash the workers movement, they do not deny the holocaust, they do not admire Hitler. The OO are a fairly large Protestant organisation, they have thousands of members. Are you catogorising the whole membership of the OO as fascist? If you do catogorise the OO as fascist would you then support the smashing of that organisation?

The OO are a right wing quasi christian bigoted organisation, there are loads of very similar organisations in the Catholic Church. Should the AOH or Opus Dei be catogorised as Fascist? Of course not.

by matt Thu Dec 04, 2003 18:09

is indeed the Irish equivalent of the type of racist, ethnicist and sectarian (including anti-semetism) that are fundamentally the basis of fascism. But even apart from that, I fail to see what the distinction is between the Orange Order wanting to exercise their traditonal rights to oppress fenians and the BNP's attitude to black people in Britain. Certainly Orangeism, loyalism and British fascism recognise that they are fellows, but of course this does not fit with the SP's erroneous conception of Irish history, culture or political dynmaics.

by tintin Thu Dec 04, 2003 17:20

Of course the SP do not say that the BNP should have the right to negociate with residents of Oldham. The BNP is a fascist organisation, they should be given no platform whatsoever. The OO are a right wing bigoted organisation but they are NOT fascist.

by Jimmy Thu Dec 04, 2003 10:24

Labour Youth as youth wing of the single most right wing Social Democratic Party in Europe using the Starry Plough is a insult to everything the flag stands for.
Labour have always claimed the Starry Plough and the politics of James Connolly to be theirs but it reality they have nothing in common.

1. The Flag was orginally used by the Irish Citizens Army

2. The Flag is a revolutionary symbol and has nothing to do with reformist Social Democracy.

3. The Labour Party has always ignored the North of Ireland. Connolly would spin in his grave if he knew.

4. Labour will not provide a real alternative to current government but merly replace the PD's as FF's partner.

5. The Starry Plough is still used by a number of Left organisations most of whom have far more in common with the politics of James Connolly than spoild brats in Labour Youth

by matt Thu Dec 04, 2003 10:21

Do the SP support negotiations between the BNP and residents in Oldham?

by . Wed Dec 03, 2003 23:38

magneto i thought you had left the LP?

BTW
What is the situation with the meeting held with BICO?

by The Insider Wed Dec 03, 2003 23:26

"We support the state owned nature of the economy"

God almighty. North Korea's economy is a fucking dump. There's a famine going on there because their economy is so fucked up, or hadn't you noticed. And "the nature of the economy" is an economic system designed to support a huge army - a militarised state! If that's the SP vision for the Irish economy, god help us all!

And another thing - it's plain as piss to see that if socialism is seen to offer shabby, corrupt, poor value state owned industries (as in North Korea) that only hurts the prospects for a socialist breakthrough.

by a guy called satan Wed Dec 03, 2003 23:14

My second paragraph should have read
"The socialist Party advocates a socialist Ireland and a socialist federation of Ireland ,England and Wales as part of a socialist federation of Europe"

by a guy called satan Wed Dec 03, 2003 21:19

you said above that the SP position on the national question is clear. "the Socialist Party fights for a Socialist Ireland as part of a socialist federation of Europe " .
You suggested that people who weren't clear where you stood should check out the SP website .Well, I did check it and it says:
" The Socialist Party advocates a socialist Ireland and a socialist federation of Ireland ,Scotland and Wales, on a free and equal basis, as part of a socialist federation of Europe "
Which isn't quite the same thing and doesn't clarify the Sp position on the nationaql question. .People can take what they like from the it ; it could ,for instance, mean that you support a united Ireland but only as part of a federation with England Scotland and Wales .
It's easy (almost tautological) to say you support a socialist federation of Europe , but why can't you just say whether you support an independent united Ireland or not ?

by 1912 Wed Dec 03, 2003 20:19

Its obviously Oisin Kelly. Hes upset at the great reception Paull Dillon got at the Dail today. Sulk on!

by Stephen Boyd Wed Dec 03, 2003 20:16

I am not tintin!

by TrotSPot Wed Dec 03, 2003 20:09

"Yes, we do call it a DEFORMED workers state. This does NOT mean we believe it is a utopia. We DO NOT support the bureacracy. We support the state owned nature of the economy. We call for a political revolution to kick out the bureacrats and for workers deocracy. "

You said it wasnt a Socialist state but it is a Workers State? I get the impression that you dont know what you are talking about. You are just parrotiing positions you have learned off by rote. But they are so seff contradictary you are tying yourself in knots.

North Korea a Workers State? Did you use that line in South Belfast? It might explain Barbours vote.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 20:06

The Labour Party when in power has increased funding of the Gardaí and Army, which are arms of a CAPITALIST state. Labour TDs and ministers have taken the salute of a CAPITALIST Irish Army and police force.

The fact is that I have answered your slurs when I did not have to. You have continually refused to justify the position of the LP on Bin Tax, Partnership, Shannon, USI.

You have refused to acknowledge that the expulsions of Socialists from Labour are undemocratic. You will not try to set up an opposition in Labour as you know you would get expelled.

I ahve attempted to debate about the nature of the LP, you have refused to engage but instead dodged the questions and threw up red herrings.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 20:01

SHANNON
"No. You just lied again. Use the search folks."

It has been clarified. I am not going to repeat myself on the same thread. Please just scroll up people

ORANGE ORDER
"You support the right of the Jaffas to go down the Garvaghy Road, despite the Residents opposition."

Our position is as outlined by myself and on our website/publications. I'd encourage people to read what we have to say. The OO have a right to march, they are not fascists. It is a democratic right to march. The SP DO NOT support marches without negociations with residents. the SP do not support the OO, they are a bigoted and right wing organisation.


ARMY STALL
MAGNETO: ""supporting a British Army stall at QUB"
TINTIN:Did not happen. Was just an indymedia slur. "
MAGNETO:"Another SP lie. At the time , SP members on Indy defended the stall. Use the searsh folks."
TINTIN: I do not know of ANY SP member who defended the stall in QUB. Again if you want to see the SP position on the state consult our publications.

AIRPORT COPS:
"Domnic Haugh on Indymedia attacked demonstrators because they were getting the Airport Police into trouble. Use the search facility folks."
I think Dominic was taken out of context. The SP said that the best way to get opposition to the war was for strike action by workers especially in Shannon Airport. Protesters should therefore try to win over these workers. Yet again I refer people to the ACTUAL position of the SP in our publications.

N KOREA.
MAGNETO: "You call it a Deformed Workers State. This is the standard CWI designation for states like Vietnam."

Yes, we do call it a DEFORMED workers state. This does NOT mean we believe it is a utopia. We DO NOT support the bureacracy. We support the state owned nature of the economy. We call for a political revolution to kick out the bureacrats and for workers deocracy.

NOW, I HAVE ANSWERED YOU YET AGAIN. NOW ITS OVER TO YOU. DEFEND LABOURS POSITION ON SOCIAL PARTNERSHIP, BIN TAX, SHANNON, NICE, USI....
ANSWER AND STOP GOING AROUND IN CIRCLES

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:58

You can have the last word if you want, your lies only work on the elf deluded. I hope, some day, that you get the help you require. I think I will see about starting up a deprogramming fund. Maybe you could be rescued from the CWI Cult.


I have a life to live in the real world. You can dream on. I bet you see yourself on a platform in military uniform taking the salute as the Red Army of the British Isles gives a march past.

May you be restored to sanity.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:52

Do I have to repeat that people in the LP have different positions? If any member of the SP had opposed their line on Shannon they would have been expelled.

You are the one who has the shoal of red herrings. Sheridan, Tourish, Throne, Mulholland have a beef with you.

Anyone who reads Indy regularly is aware of this. When are you going to give John Throne his appeal?

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:48

"opposing DA at Shannon, "
Has been clarified on this thread, just scroll up. "

No. You just lied again. Use the search folks.

""supporting the Jaffas right to trample the taigs,"This is not the position of the SP. The SP support negociations between the Orange Order and residents. Our position is to be found on our website."

You support the right of the Jaffas to go down the Garvaghy Road, despite the Residents opposition.

""supporting a British Army stall at QUB"
Did not happen. Was just an indymedia slur. "
Another SP lie. At the time , SP members on Indy defended the stall. Use the searsh folks.

""supporting the Airport Police at Shannonagainst demonstrators"
Again not true. We said that at a certain stage there could have been the liklihood of strike action by airport workers. ."

Domnic Haugh on Indymedia attacked demonstrators because they were getting the Airport Police into trouble. Use the search facility folks.

""calling N Korea a Socialist State."
The SP do not call N Korea a socialist state. "
You call it a Deformed Workers State. This is the standard CWI designation for states like Vietnam.

Now , I have once again dealt with your lies.
And dont forget John thrones appeal.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:45

Tommy etc were not part of the Irish LP, but they were expelled by the LP leadership in Britain. The Irish LP were and are ideologically very similar and they used the expulsion of Militant in Britain to do the same in Ireland.

The position of the SP on the national question is clear and there for everyone to read on our website and in our publications. The SP fight for a Socialist Ireland as part of a socialist confederation of Europe. This is not a return to British imperialism, it is a voluntary and equal confederation with European workers.

Now please stop throwing up red herrings and mud slinging and ANSWER the questions regarding your parties position on Nice, Shannon, Bin Tax, Social Partnership, USI...

by Shaggy Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:41

Wasn't there a popstar called Stephen 'tintin' something.

Does Boyd have more aliases than the border fox?

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:39

"opposing DA at Shannon, "

Has been clarified on this thread, just scroll up.

"supporting the Jaffas right to trample the taigs,"

This is not the position of the SP. The SP support negociations between the Orange Order and residents. Our position is to be found on our website.

"supporting a British Army stall at QUB"
Did not happen. Was just an indymedia slur. Our position on the Army and the capitalist state is clear. We do not support any recruitment stall for the army or police forces.

"supporting the Airport Police at Shannonagainst demonstrators"
Again not true. We said that at a certain stage there could have been the liklihood of strike action by airport workers. Agian please consult our website for our real position.

"calling N Korea a Socialist State."
The SP do not call N Korea a socialist state. It is NOT a socialist state. It is a corrupt rotten stalinist bureacracy. The SP/CWI call for a political revolution in North Korea that would overthrow the bureacrats and bring about workers democracy.

Now I have answered your slurs/questions please try to justify your party's position on Social Partnership, bin tax, nice, shannon, USI....

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:37

"You mentioned Throne, he was a member of Labour at time of expulsions as was Finn Geaney. Dermot Connolly was personally expelled from Labour as was Tommy Sheridan and most of SSP leadership."

John Throne was not even in Ireland at the time. He had been gone since 1983. He has written here that he was not even allowed to get involved in the campaign against the expulsions.

Tommy Sheridan was not a member of the Irish Labour Party. You may not be aware of it but the 26 counties ceased to be part of the United Kingdom in 1922. I know we'd be back in if the CWI had their way.

And what do Dermot Connolly, Finn Geaney and Tommy Sheridan think of CWI democracy now?

And dont forget John Thrones appeal.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:32

"If I had been in the LP at the time of expulsion of Militant, I would have opposed it. "

Thats what I wrote in the comment headed Reality check.

But Militant werte a party within a party. Otherwise how they have been a section of the CWI? Do you think that Indy readers are morons?

My point stands: Militant never admiited they were an organisation. They pretended they were supporters of the paper.

Anyway, what about John Thrones appeal?

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:31

You mentioned Throne, he was a member of Labour at time of expulsions as was Finn Geaney. Dermot Connolly was personally expelled from Labour as was Tommy Sheridan and most of SSP leadership.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:28

Please justify the Sp positions on:
opposing DA at Shannon,
supporting the Jaffas right to trample the taigs,
supporting a British Army stall at QUB,
supporting the Airport Police at Shannon against demonstrators,
calling N Korea a Socialist State.

As has been pointed out on Indymedia in the past, the SP are thin on the ground in the Inner City, Cabra and the Docks area.

Anyway what about John Thrones appeal?

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:27

So you support the expulsion of Militant??

This is bullshit about 'party within a party'. Militant were expelled because they opposed and organised a coherent socialist opposition to the right wing leadership. If you think it was really because of some technical breach of the constitution you are truly niave. They were expelled for being socialists.

In any case, surely within a so called 'democratic' party you should be able to have your own publications and organise your own internal meetings?

It is FACT that if you organise real left wing opposition to the leadership in the LP you WILL be expelled. Magneto, if you are genuine I would challenge you to set up an opposition movement around a socialist programme with the other 'individuals' and see what happens

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:22

"Most of those that you mentioned WERE members of Labour"

None of them were members of the Labour Party at the time of the expulsions so you are spouting hypothetical nonsense.

Lets get back to the reality that ALL of these people are disenchanted with the SP/CWI. And lets not forget the matter of John Thrones appeal.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:22

You can make all the claims you like about what 'individual members' get up to. What ever I say, you can say 'individual members' did this or that. What about the Labour Party as a whole, that is what I am interested in as there is no serious coherent left opposition within the Labour Party.

I think that the SP do have members involved in nearly every campaign. In any case at the depots I would have seen or heard about Labour members. I was at several depot demos and have talked to people from many many campaigns and parties, NOWHERE did I come accross or hear of a LP member involved in the campaign.

Yes Cole and a few others did oppose Nice but the LP along with HUGE MAJORITY of its membership supported and campaigned for the Nice Treaty.

Now please justify the Labour position on USI, Nice, Social Partnership, Bin Tax, Shannon...

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:17

I have made it clear that I oppose some LP policies, I also made it clear that a minority of LP members took part in DA, opposed Nice and took part in DA against BIn Tax. I oppose Social Partnership as do many LP members. But in the LP people are allowed to disagree with eachother.

Militant were thrown out because they had organised a party within the party. Now that is the truth. It was in breach of the LP constitution. At no stage did Militant attempt to have the constitution changed. They had little refard for democracy.

Anyway, when is John Throne going to get his appeal?

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:12

"The SP's positon on all these issues can be seen from their publicationa and their statement in the media"

But you will get the truth here on Indymedia. Just use the search facility and read it for yourselves.

Tintin, you are getting madder and madder because you know your lies are deluding yourself. LP members were at the fence in Shannon with GNAW while Joe Higgins was attacking them. O'Brien & Haugh did everything they could to sabotage the DA.

You know that Labour members actively opposed Nice, yes there was a Labour group orgainised by Roger Cole.

There are many Anti Bin Tax Groups, especially in the City area which have no SP members. You dont know who is involved.

Anyway, what about John Thrones appeal?

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:10

Magneto, the FACT is that the LP leadership pledged to expell any member that had any involvment with 'Militant'.

As a result the LP is now totally undemocratic. If you organise a serious left wing opposition to the leadership you WILL be expelled.

BTW
Most of those that you mentioned WERE members of Labour.Now please justify your party's position on Bin Tax, Shannon, USI, Nice and Social Partnership. You continually refuse to do so.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:06

You are clearly unable to justify the LP's position on Shannon, Nice, Bin Tax and USI.

The SP's positon on all these issues can be seen from their publicationa and their statement in the media. Available on the party's website. If you visit these sites you will discover at no time have I tried to lie about the SP's position. Magneto you have tried to lie about the LP's positions. You claimed that the Lp opposed Nice, supported bin tax blockades/ non payment and participated in DA in Shannon. They did not.

I am not lying whatsoever. I am not fooling anyone. You are.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:03

"Technically they may not have been expelled but if they ever wrote for 'Militant' or organised opposition to the leadership they would have been."

Technically? They_were_not_members_so_could_not_have_been_expelled.

You might as well say, technically, they were not women, but if they had been , they could have got Maternity Benefit if they were pregnant.

You still havent told us why John Throne was not allowed an appeal by the US section or the CWI.
The fact remains that the SP/CWI is a cultist dictatorship. Anyone who goes against the leadership gets the chop.

by SPI or SPY (sounds the same) Wed Dec 03, 2003 19:00

"While residents were being savagly attacked by cops and being hauled infront of the High Court and sent to the joy the Lp were condemning them and calling for payment."

Not SB or KMcL. Too good for the chosen ones?

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:58

Look, all people have to do is use the search facility on Indymedia to back and see what was said abou Shannon at the time. Domnic Haugh, made the comments about the cops firing into the crowd. He also attacked Direct Action because it was getting the Airport Cops in to trouble! Michael O'Brien and others spread the scare about the need for medical back up.

Joe Higgins described GNAW as Virtual Warriors. I wont go on. You are lieing just as you have about other things here.

You dont even fool yourself.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:55

Their 'beef' is also with you. The Lp pledged to expell any supporters of Militant they could find. Technically they may not have been expelled but if they ever wrote for 'Militant' or organised opposition to the leadership they would have been.

The Labour Party is not democratic.

I would ask John Throne etc to come on here now and state that the LP are not democratic. If you do not you are being used by the right wing to attack the left.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:51

"You sabotaged the DA. Even spreading scare stories about the need for Doctors and saying that the Gardai might fire into the crowd."

Not true. Look at the publications of the party, look at the statements made in the papers and TV. Where are your sources? Compare it to the statements and actions of the LP. They boycotted the demos, held their own in St Stephens Green and added significantly to the scare stories in the media.


"As you well know, individual members of the LP are active in the Bin Tax campaign. "

I am very active in the bin tax campaign and I know of NO labour members that have been active in any way. Please if you do know of these people please tell us where are they active, what are their names? While residents were being savagly attacked by cops and being hauled infront of the High Court and sent to the joy the Lp were condemning them and calling for payment.

"Your lies about Nice fool no one."
It is truth. As with Bin tax there was NO real opposition to the leadership regarding Nice. Labour campainged for a Yes vote. They called on people to 'hold their fire' until June. This is well documented fact. Please stop trying to rewrite history.

"AGain & Again, the SP do not mention every campaign in every leaflet. Tou are exposing yourself as a sectarian fool."

I am not claiming that the SP do mention every campaing in every leaflet. Stop trying to bring up red herrings. The fact is that the LP did not critisise the USI leadership or call for joint student and worker action in opposition to cuts.

It is not sectarian to raise honest critisisms of others. Anyhow it is not sectarian as LP are not part of the workers movement, they are a capitalist party.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:48

If I had been in the LP at the time of expulsion of Militant, I would have opposed it. John Throne, Denis Tourish, Marc Mulholland, Bill Webster were not expelled by the Labour Party.


Their Beef is with you. At least those expelled from Labour had the right to appeal. Something the SP/CWI would not give to John Throne.

Why wont you let John Throne have his right of appeal to the CWI World Congress?

by Cheron Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:44

It looks like you have brought all the puppies out of quarantine.
Hold on Indy viewers, its going to be a rough ride.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:42

Why don't you ask those same people about democracy in the Labour Party? They were expelled from your party for organising opposition to the right wing leadership and calling for socialism.

Magneto you are a reformist not a socialist. Grow up and stop trying to fool people.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:41

"The SP opposed DA at Shannon on March 1st for TACTICAL reasons. The SP do not see DA as an ideology but as a tactics that can be used, sometimes it is not the best thing to do"

You sabotaged the DA. Even spreading scare stories about the need for Doctors and saying that the Gardai might fire into the crowd.

"The Labour Party at March 1st boycotted the deomstrations totally. Instead they with the GP held an alternative demo in Dublin. "

Members of the Labour Party went against this line and took part in the DA. No member of the SP went against their orders.

"This added further fuel to the fire that was burning in the media against the anti war movement and allowed the media portray the protesters as violent."

The SP and the SWP attacked the DA in the media. Joe Higgins went on to call GNAW Virtual Warriors as they were being arrested.

As you well know, individual members of the LP are active in the Bin Tax campaign.
Where were the SP as the cops were hauling people off at Shannon? They were cheering on the Airport Cops.

Your lies about Nice fool no one.

AGain & Again, the SP do not mention every campaign in every leaflet. Tou are exposing yourself as a sectarian fool.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:40

I am not saying a revolution is on the cards right now. What you seem to be claiming that it is off the cards for ever at best for generations and that we should therefore just look for reforms. You even say that it is childish to fight for revolution

I do believe that things change and that a revolutionary situation can and will develop in Ireland. I am not going to gove a time scale, but I am convinced it will happen.

I would catogorise a revolutionary period as a time in which the ruling class is divided and can't find a way out, workers are open to socialist ideas and willing to fight for change and where their is a workers movement willing take the power away from capitalists

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:34

We could be engaged in a whole series of 'you said we said' whataboutary, it would not get us far. But I will clarify a few things here.

The SP opposed DA at Shannon on March 1st for TACTICAL reasons. The SP do not see DA as an ideology but as a tactics that can be used, sometimes it is not the best thing to do. On March 1st the SP discussed it fully and came to the conclusion that DA would not be the best for the movement at that time.

The Labour Party at March 1st boycotted the deomstrations totally. Instead they with the GP held an alternative demo in Dublin. This added further fuel to the fire that was burning in the media against the anti war movement and allowed the media portray the protesters as violent.

The SP has a fine record of DA. For example in the bin tax struggle. It was the SP and other who called for and participated in blockades. Where were Labour? While residents were being beaten off their own streets by cops and being sent to prison, the LP were condemning the protests and calling for payment of the tax.

Labour members may have opposed Nice, but not 'Labour members against Nice' group was formed. The leadership had no serious opposition against their pro Nice stance. LAbour campaing vigourosly for a Yes vote. They even urged people to 'hold their fire' until next June! The Lp could have turned the referendum into a referendum on the govt which could have seen the fall of the FF/PDs. But they did not do this. A No vote woulf have been a blow to Irish and European capitalism, ultimately when it come to the crunch the LP know who to back.

AS for the USI demo the SP leaflet called for joint action of workers and students to shut down colleges in opposition to cuts. (A form of DA by the way). Labour did not do this.
The SP leaflet also severly critisised USI leaders. Labour did not do this, you are one with the USI bureacrats.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:28

I dont think revolution is likely in the short to medium term, any sane rational person would accept this as being true. What objective set of circumstances do you think would result in a revolution?

If the masses didnt revolt in the 1980s when the SP/CWI was at least as big as they now are (far far bigger in the North) why would they now revolt.

Grow up.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:24

"Labour is not a democratic party, ordinary members can't influence policy. If they attempt to do so in a real way they will be kicked out."

All of the above is true of the SP/CWI. Just ask John Throne or Denis Tourish or Dermot Connolly or Finn Geaney or Marc Mulholland or Bill Webster or The Pakistan CWI Section or the South African CWI Section or the SSP.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:22

"I THINK..." what IS labours policy? Will they nationalise under workers control the largest and most important companies? No, of course this is not their position, your solution is realisable under capitalism. LAbour only want to reform capitalism not abolish it.

You also rule out revolution! You seem believe that the working clas is NEVER going to move into serious opposition to capitalism. You are a reformist, Labour are reformist, you are not socialists and your are not revolutionaries so please stop pretending to be

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:21

They oppose Direct Action At Shannon.

They supported the Airport Cops at Shannon.

They support the Orange Orders "right" to march in Norther Ireland.

Look, why dont you guys grow up? I can say things about the SP just like you can about Labour. Thats not going to defeat the bin tax or cuts in Education or anyother cuts.

As I wrote , Trots do not put their entire programme into EVERY leaflet or EVERY speech.

As for Nice, as you well; know, LP members did campaign against it. LP members were also face to face with the workers in uniform at Shannon while Joe Higgins was calling GNAW "Virtual warriors".

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:14

Ift here was a major decline in taxation, then there would have to be some cause. What are you suggesting a depression economic collapse. Its unlikely that such an event would only occur in Ireland.

In such a situation I think Labour should increase taxes on the rich, seize the real estate, accounts and shares of the rich if they tried to move theie assets offshore

One thing is fairly certain, theres not going to be a revolution. Even in the dark days of the 1980s when the SP were in Labour, the masses didnt revolt.

by tintin Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:12

The 'trots' (I take if you mean the SP) did say that they were opposed to all cuts across the board in their leaflet. They also linked it with the bin tax and other cuts. They also called for workers and student action to shut down colleges in opposition to cuts.

If the campaign against cuts is to be successful the government need to be confronted with a united campaign of students, workers and community groups accross all sectors to bring down the government. Labour are not really serious. They dont want the working class to move into action and bring down the government, Labour want people to 'hold their fire' (Labour slogan from Nice) until June when they can vote Labour.

by Niamhanna Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:07

Labour are a right wing party. Rabbite supports privitisation, Social partnership, the Nice Treaty, the EU, Blair, Schroeder, SDLP, bin tax, union bureacrats, war in Iraq with UN backing, sanctions on Iraq.....

He opposes, the bin tax campaigns, non payment of bin tax, trade unions calling strikes in opposition to bin tax, protesting at Shannon.

What Labour are engageing in is opposition posturing in an attempt to appear to the 'left'. Labour Youth are engaging in this too. The leadership of the party see their 'left' veneer of their youth as harmless as they know they will soon grow out of it when they get the smell of a career in their nostrils and because they will have no effect whatsoever. Labour is not a democratic party, ordinary members can't influence policy. If they attempt to do so in a real way they will be kicked out.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 18:07

The demo was about cuts in Education. Not even Trots mention every single campaign or every area in each speech or leaflet.

by ucdbouy Wed Dec 03, 2003 17:47

Labour in UCD DO NOT oppose all cutbacks. They peddle the line that they are opposed to cuts in 'student services' especially the library. They would support the sacking of staff in the canteens, computer services and some lecturers. This is their position.

They also peddled the line today at the demo that they oppose cuts in EDUCATION not elsewhere. They would be happy to see cuts in other areas like social welfare, health, agriculture, local govt etc.

In the leaflet Labour handed out they DO NOT call for opposition to ALL cuts and for a campaign agaisnt the government.

What I would like to ask LP members on this site, if tomorrow Labour was elected into power and there was a massive decline in taxation income what would they do exactly?

by LY watch Wed Dec 03, 2003 17:29

Yis nearly had me believing that you were honest about building a genuine socialist alternative.

And then you had to go and ruin all it by saying - 'Ivana Bacik'.

by Roger Casement Wed Dec 03, 2003 16:58

Ivana supports the LGBT Community, lets support her!

Special Guest Presenter: MC Panti

Venue: GUBU, Capel Street, Dublin 1

When: Monday, 8th December at 8pm

How much: 24 euro per table of four


Hello all,

Finola McTernan and Trish Brennan have been selected as the glamorous Pub-Quiz organisers for Ivana Bacik's glamorous European Election Campaign, we are thinking of glamorous nights in Brussels in the future! We ho pe you can come along and support us!

Ivana Bacik (GCN's columnist and our friend and idol) has been selected as Labour candidate to fight the European ele ctions in
Dublin in June 2004. She is a well-known campaigner on human rights and equality issues. The Ivana Bacik campaign is holding a pub quiz to raise awareness and campaign funds. For more information on Ivana,
check out

[email protected]
Website: www.ivanabacik.com


Trish Brennan 087 233 6042 / Finola McTern an 087 827 8146

ring if you have any queries or want to reserve tables!

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 15:45

Labour Youth were prominent among 5,000 students who protested at the Dail this afternoon. The protest was against closures, cutbacks and increases in charges and any return of fees. Among those who addressed the crowd was Paul Dillon, President, UCDSU and Labour Youth member.

by Still waters Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:38

Matt, you mentioned the coalition of 1973 to 1977. I remember it well. I will NEVER forgive the labour party for what was perhaps their worst act of collaboration with the blueshirt party. It was a truly despicable episode.

by TrotSPot Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:33

I am not in the LP. I'm an independent who, as a public service, points out hypocrisy.

by TrotSBot Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:33

TrotSPot = Steven Boyd. Ya fool no one.

by matt Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:27

SP have absolutely no business criticisng anyone for being 'right wing' or coalitionist given their pathetic history as part of the LP during that party's time in government during the most reactionary periods of recent Irish history.

by Non-Trot Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:27

"The CWI happily stayed in Labour during three Coalition Governments which carried out ferocious attacks on workers and the unemployed."

Interesting a leftie who takes pleasure in the fact that his/her own party took part in ferocious attacks on the workers and unemployed. I'm beginning to think that it is maybe you who is trot.

by TrotSPot Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:20

C'mon you are in the SP, admit it! The Walkerite jibe must have smarted. You guys spent long enough in the Labour Party. You didnt leave vountarily. The CWI suddenly discovered that the LP was reactionary AFTER they had been thrown out. The CWI happily stayed in Labour during three Coalition Governments which carried out ferocious attacks on workers and the unemployed.

by Non-trot Wed Dec 03, 2003 12:11

"I think the socialists in SF and the LP should argue against coalition both North and South. Go on to lead genuine socialist oppositions to the capitalist parties."

Not a chance (who's the real potheads?).
You will have to leave before you can do anything, as much and all as you hate the 'Walkerite' SP, not even they could build an opposition and there isn't even an embryonic base in either the LP or SF for a left revival.

by Magneto Wed Dec 03, 2003 11:50

SF is not a right wing organistion, never mind the potheads. But LP is isnt right wing either, it has strayed from the left path and has gone into coalition but so has SF. I can understand why SF would go into government in the North; after all its what a lot of your voters demand. After generations of being excluded from power, even from voting, the pull of government is strong.

There are genuine socialists in SF just as they are in the LP. I think the socialists in SF and the LP should argue against coalition both North and South. Go on to lead genuine socialist oppositions to the capitalist parties.
Connollys flag belongs to all of us who fight for a 32 County Socialist Republic.

But the SP and some in the LP stand in the tradition of Walker rather than of Connolly, the Plough is not theirs.

by matt Wed Dec 03, 2003 11:25

organisation to pervert the Starry Plough is the Labour Party

by TrotSPot Wed Dec 03, 2003 11:20

non-trot = Steven Boyd. Ya fool no one.

by Non-trot Wed Dec 03, 2003 11:16

"It is not always good to dwell on the past as other left organisations do, but is important to understand and recognise history and roots of trade unionism and socialism in Ireland."

Then you won't have to remember all the coalition governments that your lot were in, the dogdy militaristic stalinism of your leadership and the fact that the trade union leadership sold out the working class when getting into to bed with the employers in what they have the cheek to call 'partnership'.

Life would be easy if we could forget the past that includes activism, campaigning and agitation. Hard to do all of that in Doheny and Nesbitt's.

by Manus Wed Dec 03, 2003 10:57

. This is a positive move on behalf of LY. Although readopting a symbol on its own isn't wholly significant. But the gradual move to the left by the organisation is.

It is not always good to dwell on the past as other left organisations do, but is important to understand and recognise history and roots of trade unionism and socialism in Ireland. I think this is one of the reason behind the move by LY.

The other reason is the continued perversion of the flag in recent years by right wing national socialist movements such as RSF, IRSP, and SF. We've already seen what they've done to our national flag. In Ireland flying the tricolour seems to have a negative image, an image of being a provo or a provo sympathiser. It is also a fact that many people perceive the starry plough to be a nationalist symbol too, again receiving a negative reaction from the general public.

It is important that nationalists don't perverse and negatively portray symbols which all Irish people should be proud to fly. The starry plough has been altered and changed over the years, from the ICA to the Republican Congress, the ITGWU and the Labour Party, the CPI, from green to red to blue, but it still holds the same value, history and meaning.

by matt Wed Dec 03, 2003 10:00

The Starry Plough was the symbol of the Irish Citizen Army NOT the Labour Party and contrary to Labour mythology, there was no connection between the two groups. In fact, it could be argued that the ICA became part of the Irish Republican Army in 1916 and that therefore the flag is an IRA flag, as indeed it has generally been regarded since that time. Indeed the Starry Plough was only highjacked by the LP around 1969 when it was attempting to compete with the republican movement. Ah, but if only the LP was as familiar with its own sad history and mythology as it cliams to be with those of its opponents. So hands off the flag I say! You've already dragged it through the mud in association with the Blueshirts as part of the most repressive, reactionary and pro-British governments since the 1920s (that would be 1973 - 1977, and again in the 1980s for neophytes who are under the impression that the LP is some kind of underground revolutionary movement)

by **** Tue Dec 02, 2003 21:24

Copyrighting the flag?
I'd love to see them going along to the IRPs to collect the royalties. Now that *would* be fun.

by Emily Tue Dec 02, 2003 21:14

A friend of mine was in attendance at the said Conference, and couldn't believe the level of debate.

Delegates insisted that they could prevent others (i.e republican and communist micro groups) from using the starry plough. One suggested that they trade mark or copyright the use of the flag to the labour youth.

Surely this isn't at all possible! Labour Youth A Middle Class Party Can't Copyright A Working Class Flag!

Emily

by Patrick Tue Dec 02, 2003 18:25

First of all in relation to the bin tax I attended several demonstrations against the imprisonment of public representitives.Second i took part in community based action the bin tax in my local area. On fingal county council labour voted against the bin tax.

Second please do not lecture me on working class areas etc. Without wishing to over play the point i have first hand experience of the inequalities and social exclusion faced by these communities. Of the 90 kids who started first year with me only 30ish done the leavingcert and half that went to thrid level. No lectures please.

Third, i disagree with the tax amnesty not going to defend it. It was wrong.

Fourth, Labour has been at the heart of the anti fees campaign, anti war movement and boycott coca cola. In order to bring the radical change needed in this country we need a change of government. I believe that a government with labour values and policies at its heart has the potential to transform this country. Rather than dwelling on the past i suggest we all focus on the future.

by Anti-Capitalist Tue Dec 02, 2003 16:15

The penultimate sentence should have read:

Fine rhethoric but truth be known the communites that you are working in on a daily basis are NOT working class communities, well at least not the ones I know.

by Anti- Capitalist Tue Dec 02, 2003 15:48

"Just to return to the issue of Labour and government. For someone to suggest that Labour is a right wing party clearly demonstrates a severe lack of understanding of politics. We are a democratic socialist party. "
That just happens to believe that the market is tameable. Rabbitte's views on the bin tax, privatisation and the public sector makes him and your party right wing in my eyes (and certainly not democratic socialist) and you saying otherwise, only makes you look delusional.

"We believe that the political process can bring about real and substantial change."
Most European SP's and CP's thought the same and they ended up being the keenest implementors of neo-liberalism, doubt that your lot will be any different.

"While we are happy to protest against and campaign against the government."
What campaigning comrade, where have you been during the most vicious onslaught to working class communities in Dublin in many along year.

"What makes us distinctive is that we are also about building an alternative government. Its easy to sit on the sidelines and criticise or just sit around and wait for the glorious revolution."
An alternative to the other governments that you were in, propping up capitalism. Another tax amnesty anyone?

"The reality is that peoples lives need to be changed now. The fact of the matter is that while all the marxists, anarchists and whatever else are arguing among themselves about some obscure point of ideology. The Labour Party is working on a daily basis within communities and developing policies that have the potential for real change in this country. The left is strongest when it is united not dividied."
Fine rhethoric but truth be known the communites that you are working in on a daily basis are working class communities, well at least not the ones I know.

And before you start your mantra, sorry to burst your bubble but I'm neither a trot or an anarchist!!

by Patrick Tue Dec 02, 2003 14:46

Just to return to the issue of Labour and government. For someone to suggest that Labour is a right wing party clearly demonstrates a severe lack of understanding of politics. We are a democratic socialist party. We believe that the political process can bring about real and substantial change. While we are happy to protest against and campaign against the government. What makes us distinctive is that we are also about building an alternative government. Its easy to sit on the sidelines and criticise or just sit around and wait for the glorious revolution. The reality is that peoples lives need to be changed now. The fact of the matter is that while all the marxists, anarchists and whatever else are arguing among themselves about some obscure point of ideology. The Labour Party is working on a daily basis within communities and developing policies that have the potential for real change in this country. The left is strongest when it is united not dividied.

by matt Tue Dec 02, 2003 09:51

Labour Youth adopting the Starry Plough may be quaint but it signifies nothing. As an attempt to claim the mantle of Connolly it is rather sad because the LP does not represent in any way the ideas or legacy of Connolly. Connolly's association with the Labour Party is accidental and he would no more be a member of the party now than Arthur Griffith would be of the modern version of the SInn Féin party which he founded in 1905.

by Sean Keegan Tue Dec 02, 2003 09:24

Ivana Bacik campaigning under the flag of James Connolly and the Citizen Army ??? Don't make me laugh. This careerist knows nothing of the working class, and less of the republican tradition.

by Jonah Mon Dec 01, 2003 19:05

Have to agree with a guy called Satan here. The starry plough is the flag of republican socialism. You have to remember when it was designed, the ICA and Connolly believed firmly in national liberation, the use of force to achieve it, the creation of a worker's republic.

These are things that are still needed, despite a Labour activist telling me last week when I raised the issue of Connolly's legacy with him that 'Connolly is outdated and has nothing to teach us about life in the 21st century'. And fair enough.

Please understand I am not questioning the Labour party's right to use that emblem. It was a symbol of the Labour movement for decades and while the movement has changed dramatically, and for the worst in my opinion, it is still the movement for which the flag was created.

That said, as a republican socialist, I consider the Starry Plough my flag as well, not because I am a member of the Labour party, but because I believe in the principles and concepts that flag represented when it was first raised, and the republican socialist struggle it represents.

Labour might have the right to wave it, but they don't have the right to claim its ideology, nor to deny it to those who remain loyal to the beliefs of the ICA and James Connolly.

As the song puts it:

Don't give up the dream.......
A republic, for the working class......economic liberty

by A guy called satan Mon Dec 01, 2003 18:53

The starry plough has never been the symbol of republicanism ? So does that mean it's a monarchist flag ? The flag represents the ideals and aspirations of a workers republic - that was what Conolly and the ICA fought for .

by Daniel - LY Mon Dec 01, 2003 18:06

In response to CiaránÓB the Starry Plough is not and has never been a symbol of republicanism of any kind.

It was a symbol adopted by the ITGWU and then an altered version adpoted by the ICA. Which was a workers organisation dedicated to defending Irish people on strike or in revolution, as a responce to Bloody Sunday 1913.

The Labour Party adopted the Plough and used it as its logo for many years, both the blue ICA version and an altered red version.

As i said at the conference, when proposing my motion. The flag is a workers flag. A flag of international solidarity from irish workers.

And no nationalist will convince me of his or her dedication to socialism by telling me otherwise or claiming it for thier closed, un-internationalist movement.

by CiaránÓB - People's Front of Judaea Mon Dec 01, 2003 17:40 citizenarmy at hotmail dot com

What kind of coalition is that where anyone else who wants to be involved must bend the knee to the dictatorship of the Labour (sic) party?

By the way, the reason why most people presumed that the coalition statement was referring to right-wing parties is because LABOUR IS A RIGHT WING PARTY!

Labour has more in common with FF, FG, and the PDs than it does with any of the more left parties (and it's not particularly hard to be on the left of Rabbitte's Labour).

by Patrick Mon Dec 01, 2003 17:13

Just to clarify something the motion on coalition ruled out any coalition with any party unless Labour was the largest party. It did not make reference to left or right. Implicit in this position is a view that any party seeking to govern with Labour will have to accept our policy agenda.

by Lord Wouldbegood Mon Dec 01, 2003 17:04

The Nice Treaty was fought by a coalition of left and right, I didn't here any calls from the left to stop people voting no for the wrong reasons. The left was just happy to get the far-right votes in the ballot box.

Death to all who refuse me.

by Doubting - Tomas Mon Dec 01, 2003 16:41

"At the Labour Youth conference held in Nenagh over the weekend, delegates voted to re-adopt the starry plough as the official emblem of Labour Youth. The decision was symbolic of a general move towards the left by Labour Youth over the last number of years."

Adopting a logo does not symbolise a move to the left

"A Pro choice motion was endorsed demanding the availability of free, safe and legal abortion in Ireland. Delegates denounced privatisation in all its forms"

Good news I will assume LY will be then backing a new leader as Rabbitte has openly stated "no one cares who controls the busses once they run on time". I look forward to Rabbitte and his Labour Nua shite being dumped.

"The conference also condemned any future coalitions with any party of the right, unless Labour was the majority party."

Why would you consider coalition even if you were in the majority. Some of us remember the tax on clothing and footwear in the dark 1980's, the product of a coalition government. At the same time FF and FG were amassing millions in shady deals with their builder/business mates. A left organisation does not go into coalition with the right under any circumstances

by Ciara Mon Dec 01, 2003 15:52 bacikforeurope at ivanabacik dot com

IVANA BACIK CAMPAIGN

PUB QUIZ

Teacher's Club, 36 Parnell Square, Dublin 1

Tuesday, 9th December at 8pm

40 euro per table of four

Ivana Bacik has been selected as a Labour candidate to fight the European
elections in Dublin in June 2004. Every election campaign costs money and
the Ivana Bacik campaign is holding a pub quiz to raise campaign funds.
We hope you can come along and support us!

by Unity Mon Dec 01, 2003 15:48

Unity on the left is needed, nothing wrong with John pointing out the evils of Coalition. But the SP in particular make unity difficult with theior incessant attacks on the LP and their sectarianism towards the Workers Party.

Sinn Fein also deserve some criticism but again the SP seem to use every posting on the bin tax to raise Sligo or Mark Daly. Thats not going to help build the campaign or any left unity.

by CiaránÓB - People's Front of Judea Mon Dec 01, 2003 15:39 citizenarmy at hotmail dot com

Maybe someone could nail Rabbitte on his own and his party's stance to the Anti-Bin Tax protests.

And as for anyone associated with the Labour Party using the Starry Plough, that just makes me feel sick. The Starry Plough was designed as the flag of Socialist Republicanism, and the Labour Party is neither socialist nor Republican. Should we really expect its youth wing to be any different?

Then again, I suppose it's that sad little red version that the Communist Party youth (Ógra Uí Chonghaile) uses.

by 1912 Mon Dec 01, 2003 15:33

Your co thinkers in Brazil are part of a coalition government. Dont give us any blather abiut them being pure. The fact remains that they are part of that government and are fighting top remain within it.

Watch out for the log in your own eye.

by John Meehan Mon Dec 01, 2003 15:27

Signs are that Labour Youth is moving to the left - very good news.

It is great that LY people have been actively working with others in campaigns such as Boycott Coke - the more practical co-operation there is on the left, on various issues, the better.

It will be interesting to see what position LY takes on the forthcoming referendum on the EU Constitution - any news on that?

LY people would be very welcome at next Saturday's meeting organised by DAPSE on this subject - plenty of information on this elsewhere on Indymedia.

There is a glaring weakness in the LY position on coalition with the right :

"unless Labour was the majority party"

This is no good. Any coaltion with the right wing parties - even if Labour is the majority party - will mean the same right wing policies. The only difference will be cosmetic - different people implementing the same right wing policies.

This LY formula is a get-out clause for the Labour pro-coalitionist right - a guarantee it will remain a "mercs and perks" party. Incidentally, the Labour line is no different in substance from the policy pursued by Sinn Féin.

The anti-coalition poistion put forward by the Socialist Party and others on the left is much better - and it is consistent with the line put forward in previous decades by left wingers such as the late Matt Merrigan, former district secretary of the ATGWU.

Great to see the Starry Plough replacing the insipid rose or Tony Blair, François Mitterrand, Gerhard Schroeder and Dick Spring!

by Paul Kinsella - CPSU (Personal Capacity) Mon Dec 01, 2003 14:56 paulkinsella53 at yahoo dot com 53 Lorcan Grove, Santry, Dublin 9 085-1478100

...At the public meeting tonight (Monday the 1st) to stop the cuts in Beaumont Hospital at 8pm in the Lorcan Community Hall, Lorcan Green, Santry, organised by the Labour Party. Guest speaker is Pat Rabbite.

by 1912 Mon Dec 01, 2003 14:54

Good to see it making a comeback in part of Labour. LY will fly the Starry Plough while the SY are happy to march under the Union Jack in a Federation of The British Isles.

Smash IMperialism! For a 32 County Socialist Republic free of English tyranny!
For a Socialist Wales, Scotland, Cornwall and Brittany !

For a United Celtic States as part of a Socialist States of Europe!