Fairview Against the War joins groups that have disaffiliated from the IAWM

by John M. Sat Mar 06, 2004 00:15

The SWP must surely be engaged in a wee bit of self-criticism by now?

Cork, Clare, Limerick, Fairview - all gone - and loads of resignations from the IAWM steering committee. Constitutes a serious split. Anybody other than the SWP left? What about the other non-SWP steering committee members? And are the Socialist Party still propping up this SWP plaything?

Any chance of a statement on the SWP rigging of IAWM national meetings, and the expulsion of committee members, from Joe Higgins TD and SP? Why the silence?

by sumdumguy Sat Mar 06, 2004 01:14

Once Kevin McLoughlin decides sorry I mean the committee or whatever crap the are using to hide the nature od democratic centralism then you will know.

The SP seem to be undergoing a time of playing it safe sith elections coming up.

by please look at the keyboard while typing - thank yoy Sat Mar 06, 2004 01:26

.

by :) Sat Mar 06, 2004 07:45

SP would need to play that one careful now.
The Irish working class will want to know what anti war group they are affiliated to, could cost thousands of votes you know:)

by Curious Sat Mar 06, 2004 13:13

still affiliated to the IAWM?

by John Cunningham - Galway Alliance Against War Sat Mar 06, 2004 17:31

…would prefer not to answer CURIOUS'S question at present.

We are busy preparing for 3 anti-war events in the week 14 - 20 March.

At a routine business meeting of the Alliance during the week (attended by more than 30 members), the tensions in the anti-war movement nationally were discussed briefly. The general feeling was that efforts to reconcile the people who had recently resigned from the national committee with those who remained on it should be supported.

Personally, I think it is important that there be a functioning national committee with sufficient credibility to call national demonstrations, &c., when appropriate. Those remaining on the steering committee should take steps to adapt that body in ways that would make it more acceptable to those who have recently left. (The lifting of suspensions would be a start, but no more than a start).

For their part, the people who have resigned should give the down-sized steering committee a chance to make amends

by Deirdre Clancy Sat Mar 06, 2004 17:56

The Fairview Group is one of the few active groups left in Dublin. After the bombardment of Iraq was 'over' most other groups started to meet once a month, but Fairview voted to keep up the momentum against the occupation (rightly so) and meet weekly. As far as I know, they were the only group in Dublin to do this, although other groups began to follow their lead later on. They are the most active and dynamic of the groups and always have been. I don't have any axe to grind here: although I have been to Fairview meetings, I haven't been really active in the group due to my own commitments with ploughshares and other work I am doing. They are an important bunch of people in the movement by any estimation.

It should, therefore, be seen as a blow to the IAWM that they have disaffiliated. If it is ignored, there is something seriously wrong.

When groups with great credibility such as CAWC, MAMA and the Fairview Group disaffiliate, there is clearly a problem and it is time for certain individulas to develop some self-awareness about how things look to people on the outside.

Aside from that, I did not agree with the manner in which the suspension of two people from the SC was executed. It was not put on the meeting's agenda, so people who might have otherwise made the effort to query it did not get the opportunity to do so. I could understand how such behaviour might have merited some sort of serious censure, given that it involved personalised attacks on good people - transparency was a problem though.

However, I think it is time to move on from this and build a proper, inclusive movement. There is no point nursing these wounds anymore. It is a very minor thing in the context of what is going on in Iraq, Afghanistan and the whole of the Middle East. CAWC, MAMA and the Fairview Group, along with Galway's numerous motivated activists, are a good starting point for building a movement that appreciates the contribution of diverse groups with diverse philosophies. I believe the Irish Anti-War Network has been suggested as a name, and I think this is a good idea.

As someone involved in civil disobedience/NVDA, I have found it disheartening that people within the IAWM, particularly the SWP members, find this to be an elitist form of opposition to war. There are many other equally valid forms of opposition and I appreciate this. But to say it is elitist because only some people feel they wish to do it is something of a moot point when there are people dying. You might as well say that it was elitist for men to refuse the draft rather than go to Vietnam during that war, because only some wanted or felt able to do it. That is one of my main quibbles with the IAWM. Quantity of people clearly did not make the Taoiseach or any other world leader sit up and fully listen on Feb. 15th - it is not the only factor to consider. But it seems to be the sacred cow with the SWP SC members. This is problematic thinking, especially in light of the gravity of the situation, with Blair hinting in a speech yesterday at more 'pre-emptive strikes' and expressing a blatant disregard for international law and the UN Charter, by saying these were ill-equipped to deal with the current terrorist threat (i.e. he didn't wish to have to take either the UN or international law into consideration anymore). We can expect more attempts at pre-emptive bombardments of countries, and world politics and policy appears to be in the hands of poweful, right-wing fanatics. I hope the level of opposition escalates to reflect this, both in numbers and in the nature of the opposition, be it demos, civil disobedience, NVDA, lobbying, strikes, etc. Let us build a movement that respects each of these types of contribution.

by lmnop Sat Mar 06, 2004 17:59

.

by Fintan Lane - Cork Anti-War Campaign Sat Mar 06, 2004 18:55

The Irish Anti-War Network idea is a proposal to form, initially, a loose network between independent anti-war groups. It is not meant to create another version of the IAWM. If it develops into something larger (organically) then well and good, but the proposal at the moment is focused on the modest objective of creating a working relationship between independent anti-war groups (embracing diversity, and collabororating, where appropriate, in a democratic, transparent and equal manner).

The SWP and IAWM remain part of the diversity of the anti-war movement in Ireland, and should be respected as such. We should all aim to finds means of working together, though not on the basis that one particular group represents the totality (or majority) of the anti-war movement. That conceit should be firmly discarded.

CAWC is building for the demonstration in Dublin on March 20th, and we hope other groups will do likewise. Similarly, in the future when demonstrations are planned for Shannon, or other venues, by groups other than the IAWM, we hope people will continue to work together in a friendly and collaborative fashion.

by iosaf ipsiphi © Sat Mar 06, 2004 19:06

I think a lot of world leaders did sit up and listen, amongst them many who found their obligations as "vassals" dis-allowed them from acting on what they heard. That was one of the sweetest victories of "the movement".
Mr Blix, (who deserves his long awaited pound of flesh) has just declared that Mr Blair lacked critical thinking in the lead-up to the war. (Irish Times update)
Mr Bertie has just started his ard fheís with a call to fulfill the radicalisation of the nation which was the principles of the founding daddys (and mammys).
Now Messers Blix, Blair & Ahern have oodles of critical thinkers, but they can not a single one mobilise over twelve million people.
Mr Ahern can not say he played a part in the moblisation of 120,000 in Dublin. Nor can properly (and wisely) the varying factions cobbled together in the 2003 IAWM. Those people did so en masse. It was a very important lesson for all those with critical thinking facilities.
I didn't have a lot of critical thinking facility in the lead-up or during the war, I spent most of it trying to look symbolic on a stool outside a government and ranting peace on a radio. But I don't get to a world leader. I get to be a dingbat.
Do you think, the founder daddies and mammies of the nation said:-

One day we will achieve an astounding level of economic prosperity and one of the mammy's will coin it "Celtic Tiger".
One day we will achieve unrivalled links with the two most powerful supra-national blocks.
One day we will host the Eurovision in a cowshed.
One day we will have a myriad of "national" globally recognised symbols, brands and images.
One day we will count more Nobel Prizes per capita than any other nation.
One day we will we'll breed ourselves a generation of dingbats,
to radicalise what wasn't ready to be radicalised before
and fulfill the letter of the contract.
Irishmen and Irishwomen.

well done Bertie.
sloppy big hugs.
you heard us.

by righteous pragmatist. Sat Mar 06, 2004 22:23

My teenage sister sings into her comb and pretends she's Pink.
You people are the same.
You think that if you have "meetings" and "slogans" and if you call yourselves "activists" that somehow you are "affecting radical change."

I got news for you.

NO YOU FUCKING AREN'T!!!!

What do I tell my kid sister when she sings like pink?
Do I tell her to shut the fuck up?
Do I grab the comb off her?
Do I get angry because I am so righteously irritated?
No I don't!
I shut myself up and live and let live.
Girls will be girls!

What do governments in the West do when "radicals" march in the street with their "slogans" and their "views"?
Do they try to stop you?
In Dublin when 120000 people marched against the IRAQ war did they send in the troops? Did they machine you down Communist style? Prague Spring? Tianomen Square?
NO?NO?

They just fucking IGNORED you!!!!

MUHUHUHUHUUUHUUUUHAAAAAAA!!!!

Where is your 120000 now?
Where? I don't see them???

Kids should be seen and not heard.

Keep singing into your hairbrushes!!!

by Grey Blocker Sat Mar 06, 2004 22:44

righteous pragmatist, if you have a teenage sister then that means that you yourself are not all that mature (and your 'contributions' would certainly indicate immaturity in all the meanings of that word) so you are just a "kid" yourself, and probably younger that many of the contributors to this site. Can I suggest you get a bit of life experience under your belt before trying to lecture the rest of us.

by djc Sat Mar 06, 2004 22:57

Righteous pragmatist wasn't "lecturing" us, he was just ranting.
You're probably right though....about his 'immaturity'. He's not in a position to call iosaf a 'kid'!!

by flange joint - very organised Sun Mar 07, 2004 00:07

A grotesque overgrown child being spoonfed rediculous images of freedom and a dream of something else beyond what this society has to offer. The purpose of the soul should be one of selfish enlightenment.

Commit suicdie at the height of your beauty.

by big daddy Sun Mar 07, 2004 00:53

quote "righteous pragmatist, if you have a teenage sister then that means that you yourself are not all that mature" What???? Im sorry Grey Blocker but that is total speculation. How on earth do you know what age he is or how much "life experience" he has. You dont, or you cant be sure. You might think he is immature because of the context of his post but for all you know he could be 50. Anyway protesting is rediculous!!! (flange joint's words) It acheives nothing! I have witnessed countless protests and all to no avail, they are a waste of time! But how do you change society? By protesting? Well it hasnt worked yet! By the mass slaughtering of millions to unite those who are truly dedicated to the progression of science and art........ummmmmm

by Freddy Sun Mar 07, 2004 04:57

Protesting ridiculous? Bush, Bertie, and the rest of the war criminals would love us to believe that.
No, ignoring our protests will rebound on them in the long run. They have forgotten that they are supposed to be the servants of the people.

by virtual warrior iosaf ipsiphi © Sun Mar 07, 2004 14:33

most notably in the commerical print and TV media throughout Europe. They are now confirmed as a Western Socio-Political conglomerate of consumers with defined interests, habits and market loyalties.
If you have a teenage sister who sings into her hairbrush, I can tell you who made the bristles.
The "spontaneous" mobilisation of February 15, was an emergent property of that "WSPC" (western socio-political conglomerate) which occured "en masse". It is proved impossible to repeat, either by those who were pivotal in providing the campaign symbols, and "pitch", and equally impossible to emulate.
One small example would be the moblisation of Thursday 26th to express the Catalan people's rejection of the ETA ceasefire and it's effect on Spanish Politics, all parties (except PP) and trade unions called for a silent concetration, and supported that call with full page national press advertisments and ample TV spin off.
5000 people turned up. Equally the re-all mobilisation of Feb15 2004 showed a comparative _resistance_ to repeat.
This showed that "WSPC"groups are not so sensitive to re-sell and demostrate consumer resistance. Their consumer habits have changed in the last year most notably in precieved anti-war brands. Nor have they acquiesced to absorbtion into respective categories as "A1-C2" adults, for indeed a significant % were undefined 2nd level "c1-c2" students just like the teenage girl singing into her brush. They are a very interesting group of people. Someone should study them. Maybe someone already has.

Indeed, maybe someone should study you rightous pragmatist.

by Freddy Sun Mar 07, 2004 14:55

Yes, and while he is being studied you may find the immature git spends a lot of time playing his air guitar.

by $%€ Sun Mar 07, 2004 15:34

it's what does he play that interests us?
and she can sign into her brush all she wants, it's the conditioner we're interested in.

by louis walsh - totp Sun Mar 07, 2004 22:37

maybe your sister is pink. maybe thats not a hairbrush but a microphone.
maybe you are jealous of your sisters success.
the sell out gig in the point was great.
tell your sister we love her.
girl power forever

by David Mon Mar 08, 2004 11:16

Just a personal opinion, i dont like that name (it sounds really close to the ISWPM and calling yourself anti-... is negative)
Would something like the Irish peace network be a bit better?

by A.W.A Mon Mar 08, 2004 13:22

Are Tralee and Clonakilty still affiliated?

by Tom Mon Mar 08, 2004 16:37

Problem with calling something a 'peace network' is that it's essentially meaningless. 'Peace' is something we strive for in all aspects of our lives, and not just when we're fighting the horror of war. There is a reason why the anti-war groups in this country, and elsewhere, are called 'anti-war' groups, Negative? Only if you think being anti- mass murder is negative.

Also, the media speaks of the anti-war movement and it has a clear meaning. The 'peace' movement includes some very dubious groups like the Meath Peace Group whose leader accepts MBEs (Member of the British Empire) from a parasitical, and fundamentally anti-democratic, family in Britain. And some of the 'peace groups' set up in the 1970s and 1980s were basically pro-State and spent more time focusing on the IRA than anybody else.

We all know what 'anti-war' means, so let's stick to that.

by David Mon Mar 08, 2004 16:48

It means they can ignore all the good things that activists are for. Similarly with the "Anti-Globalisation" movement. It muddies the Issue slightly since "anti-Globalisation" could be interpreted to include many things that global justice activists are very much in favour of (allowing free movement of people and facilitating the spread and survival of many aspects of indigenous cultures)
Similarly, "Anti-War" seems a strange title for people who continously describe themselves as engaged in a class war and because it does not include many of the violent acts of political and economic warfare that certain powers are engaged in.

by splinter Mon Mar 08, 2004 16:52

Is it true that the entire saga (below) is soon to be made into a major motion picture?

by Dean Mon Mar 08, 2004 16:53

What about the class war?
I'm not against that.

by Tom Mon Mar 08, 2004 17:04

No David, 'anti-globalisation' is a problematic term because global justice activists don't actually have a problem with globalisation per se. We have a problem with the form it currently takes, where it favours coporations, imperial powers, and the wants of capitalism in general. There is another globalisation that has begun to show itself in the mere eexistence of the global justice movement itself, and at events like the World Social Forum. So, the term 'anti-globalisation' is just plain wrong and misleads people.

This is not the case with 'anti-war', and by the way the expression 'class war' is nothing more than a metaphor (it hardly denotes a desire for real war between the social classes: it's just a substitute for 'class conflict' or whatever. I hate the term 'class war' and think lefties are foolish to use it). Being 'anti-war' makes perfect sense, and nobody is any doubt about what it means. Ya can't be fluffy all the time!

So, forward with the Irish anti-war network!!

by Warrior Tue Mar 09, 2004 10:25

"I hate the term 'class war' and think lefties are foolish to use it)."

Care to tell us what you think is going on in Venezuela and elsewhere in the Americas then? Just mere class conflict or whatever?(very leftwing, that whatever)
Dream on. I think it is you who is being fluffy and all post-modern.

One war - the class war.