Sinn Féin Hosts United European Left/Green Nordic Left Delegation

by Frankie Ross Thu Mar 25, 2004 13:08

Isn't this the grouping that emerged from the old Communist and Allies Group which the Sticks were in?

As the old saying goes "What's the difference between the Provos and the Sticks?" Answer: 20 years!

Frank (Proinsias)

by Kelly's Cellar Thu Mar 25, 2004 13:22

In the headlong rush to become 'respectable' they are choosing candidates to run who are not tainted by the 'struggle'.
Might not be the new 'Sticks' but certainly post the council elections there will be a New Sinn Fein.
If Martin Cunningham or John Kelly are anything to go by it will be a difficult lonely place for some of the militant long standing members.

by Cllr Eoin O'Broin - Sinn Féin Thu Mar 25, 2004 14:03 eoinobroin at hotmail dot com

When Prionsias de Rossa was first elected to the European Parliament, his first choice of groups wasnt UEL/GNL but the Greens. My understanding was that his application was vetoed by the Irish Greens. Im not sure what he did after that, but Im pretty sure he was never a member of the UEL/GNL group. Its also interesting to note that the group has a varied membership, some communist parties, some reconstituted communists, but also many parties -particularly in Denmark, Holland, Sweded etc- who have no communist background, but are part of a Nordic trend of Green/Left parties.

On the candidate issues, Sinn Féin picks the best people for the job. Bairbre has a long activist history in Sinn Féin. Mary Lou is a newer recruit, which goes to show that as a party we take new talent and younger members seriously and promote people on merit rather then other criteria. Its also important to note that our two strongest contests -Dublin & the 6 Counties- where we hope to win seats have strong women candidates, which also demonstrates a party taking womens equality seriously.

All of this is part of the reason behind Sinn Féin's continued electoral and political growth.

by Ex Stick Thu Mar 25, 2004 14:55

In fact Proinsias De Rossa's first choice was the socialist group (ie the social democratic grouping) but he was vetoed by the Irish Labour Party and John Hume. Then he joined the UEL/GNL and remained affiliated to them until joining the Labour Party. I am certain of this because I know that De Rossa's Democratic Left had a full timer working for the UEL/GNL in Brussels.

Any way thats just by way of correcting the facts. As for the composition of the UEL/GNL it is quite a disparite grouping. It is incorrect to describe it simply as 'communist' and it certainly is'nt 'trotskyist'. It could accurately be classed as a uniting all those to the left of the PES (Social democrats) other than the Green group. It contains orthodox communist parties such as the French CP and 'new left' parties such as the SPP of Denmark and parties like the German PDS which seems to display characteristics of both. Both types of party are 'left-reformist' ie they are willing to enter government with Labour/Social democratic parties to molify the worst excesses of capitalism but these are certainly not revolutionary parties in the sense of working for a transformation of society from capitalism to workers control.

The French LCR and Lutte Ouevriere both come from the Trotskyist tradition, the LO being extremely dogmatic, while the LCR belong to the Fourth International which is far more liberal. These parties are really in the UEL/GNL because there was no other grouping for them to enter in the Euro Parliament. The Italian Rifondazione Communista, on the other hand, straddles the boundaries between these three types of party. It is worth noting that all these parties are significant forces in their own countries rather than micro-groupings confined to the margins of politics.

There is a possibilty that a new European grouping, to the left of the UEL/GNL, could emerge after the Euro-elections. The European Anti-Capitalist Left currently includes the LCR, the Scottish Socialist Party (which is almost certain of winning a seat), the Red Green Alliance in Denmark, along with parties from Norway, Netherlands, Portugal etc. These are mainly parties that have emerged from the regroupment of the far left in these counties and some such as the SSP and Left Bloc in Portugal have significant representation in their national/regional parliaments. Their ability to form a new bloc in the Euro parliament is entirely dependent on how many seats they win.

The Socialist Party in Ireland and its international body, the CWI, has been involved in discussions with the EACL but has, to date, remains unaffiliated.

The implications of Sinn fein's contacts with the UEL/GNL are another days work but one implication is clear, there is an expectation both on the part of SF and the left in the Euro Parliament that they will hold at least one seat in the new parliament.

by Cllr Eoin O'Broin - [email protected] Thu Mar 25, 2004 15:23

Thanks for that Ex-Stick, I stand corrected. A similar point was made by N Whyte on Slugger O'Toole blogsite, which I read after my own posting to indymedia. However I still think that de Rossa sought to join the Green group. Is it possible that he tried to join them after the PES?

I think the rest of the information on your post is right. In addition I think the political position and tradition of the Nordic Green/Left is interesting and quite separate from the other parties you mentioned. The main reason why the group is called UEL/GNL is due to the reluctance of the Nordic parties to join a group which was clearly (ex)community dominated, the idea being the name impolys a broadening of appeal.

Finally, we are hoping and growing confident that we can take at least two seats, Bairbre and Mary Lou...

by Liam Thu Mar 25, 2004 15:31

During the time that Frank was trying to 'become respectable', i.e. immediately before the WP split, he tried to change groups. This was one of the arguments in the WP at the time between the communists and the 'New Labour / Student Prince' types.

by Jonah - SF Thu Mar 25, 2004 15:53

Firstly, I have to admit to being very interested in SF and the UEL/GNL working together in the European Parliament if this is what takes place. As Ex Stick points out, it is a very varied and wide group basically bringing together those parties to the left of the Social Democrats, which is where I would put SF.

Secondly, in the spirit of clarifications, forming a Group is not just dependent on the number of seats, but the number of countries these seats come from.

A political group must comprise Members from more than one Member State. The minimum number of Members required to form a political group is twenty-three if they come from two Member States, eighteen if they come from three Member States and fourteen if they come from four or more Member States.

Thirdly, Groups in the EU Parliament seems to be quite loose structures. From talking to UEL/GNL people it was clear members can take different stances if they choose to. Of the 49 MEPs, almost, but not quite all, voted against the Nice Treaty. Most, but not all, are against the EU Constitution as currently manifested. It seems different positions can be adopted without shattering the integrity of the Group.

Fourthly, and going back to my first point, I think the coming together of such parties from disparate traditions (Stalinist and Trots in the one Group?) is an object lesson for the Irish Left. Here we have people who agree on 90% of things, don't agree on 10% of things but have combined to push their agenda on the 90% and leaving the rest to each party and the debate. The abscence of narrow sectarianism is a lesson for us all, including the Shinners.

by By Any Means Necessary Thu Mar 25, 2004 16:56

There will be a realignment in the european parliament with the addition of the new nations into the EU.
What that will bring is experience of state repression and division which SF voters in the six counties can identify with.

Irish history has more in common with the experiences of people such as the Czechs and the Cypriots than the Nordic or Eurocommunist parties.

With that in mind can SF form a new grouping when they win their two seats in June ?

by Republican Thu Mar 25, 2004 18:02

Is a right winger, who would be more at home as an aging adviser to Youth Defence. He is antichoice, anti gay, anti contraception.
SF are well rid of him.

by Socialist Thu Mar 25, 2004 18:10

What about Martin Cunningham then?

by shivaº Thu Mar 25, 2004 23:18

¿how many wings you have?
you know the "wings"thing, not the helicopter, not the sanitary towels in the bellies of fishes, not the Wright brother lift, the "wings".

I thought you'd like to know, the "celtic & nordic" bunch that at half time Glasgow celtic and Barça were tied. It was really lovely to see how many celtic fans came, and how many flags were flown from balconies.

by Cllr Eoin O'Broin - Sinn Féin Fri Mar 26, 2004 00:38 eoinobroin at hotmail dot com

The comments by 'Republican' regarding John Kelly are both factually incorrect and disrespectfull. Its dosent surprise me that the person who posted the comments did not have the courage to put his/her own name to them.

John Kelly is not right wing nor homophobic. He is a republican who gave great service to the struggle for an independent and democratic socialist Ireland. As the Sinn Féin equality spokesperson John was the first elected member of the assembly from any party to advocate lesbian and gay equality from the floor of the house. His engagement with broad equality and social justice issues is a matter of record. He also spoke in a recent interview to the Irish news of his left wing commitments and opposition to PPP/PFI.

While clearly John had difficulties with the development of Sinn Féin in recent years and has publically stated that this was part of his reason for resigning from the party, that does not justify people making absurd statements about his politics.

John and I did not see eye to eye on many issues but he was and remains a commited republican socialist.

by By Any Means Necessary - Sinn Fein Fri Mar 26, 2004 11:51

Eoin O'Brion has correctly rebuffed the lies posted about John Kelly.
The anti-SF rants which pass as political comment on this site have fallen to another low.

by Manus Fri Mar 26, 2004 13:30

It is most likely SF will move to align themselves with the Union for Europe of Nations Group or become non-aligned (similar to DUP), if they electe an MEP.

They clearly have similar atributs to the French Gaullists and the Danish Peoples party.

by Hebe Fri Mar 26, 2004 13:46

Congrats. You must really enjoy making an idiot of yourself in public.

by Manus Fri Mar 26, 2004 13:54

It's clearly a matter of elimination. All the other groups would most likely raise objections from current members if SF were to join, or SF themselves would not apply to join most groups.

The UEN group, a nationalist anti-EU group, fits much of the policies of SF. It is also a group of convenience similar to the technical group in the Dail.

If SF were to be Non-aligned it would virtually have no voice or influence in the EP. Or more precisely it would have no power. This is what FF have found, and in terms of their greed for power, SF and FF barely differ.

by guy with a pwd Fri Mar 26, 2004 14:11

All parties get a slagging, here and elsewhere, SF as much if nore than most. At least here they can be refuted - good to see Eoin O'Broin continuing the tradition of Justin Moran - which won SF a lot of respect for considered engagement.

by Hebe Fri Mar 26, 2004 14:15

You are making a fool of yourself. You cant really believe that SF are going to link up with these goons. If you really believe what you are writing then you have the political understanding of an eight year old.

by Curious Fri Mar 26, 2004 14:18

Manus Bree?

by observer Fri Mar 26, 2004 15:17

Amazing how the sad old LP think that they can delude themselves into beleiving that SF are something they are not. Gaullists and Danish Peoples Party!!!! In what way? What common policies?

by By Any Means Necessary Fri Mar 26, 2004 15:27

The Cause of the Fat Cats of Ireland is the Cause of Labour...this party has been deluding itself that it represents anyone but the priviliged few, the election results in June will show how far from being a party of labour it has gone.

by Observer in Germany Fri Mar 26, 2004 16:43

>the German SPD

Surely "PDS"?
Either way, they're both pro-capitalist, anti-working people parties who are in coalition government in two german states, carrying out massive social cuts.I would be interested in hearing why SF would be interested in working with such elements.

"communists, extreme socialist and trotskyites?"
The DUP man speaks through his arse once again.
"Reformists, Stalinists, Ex-Stalinists, Pro-Capitalist pseduo-lefties and a few opportunists thrown in for good measure"
would be a better description

by Cllr eoin O'Broin - Sinn Féin Fri Mar 26, 2004 18:01 eoinobroin at hotmail dot com

I may have the initials the wrong way round but there are two left parties in Germany. The Social Democrats and the Democratic Socialists. The first are in government and have dominated the labourist left in Germany since the start of the 20th century. The second are a smaller party who emerged out of the old East German Communist Party. The Social Democrats are part of the PES in Europe along with Irish Labour, the French Socialists and British Labour, the Democratic Socialists are in the UEL/GNL group. While the Democratic Socialists have about 6% nationally, in regional areas like Saxony they hold about 40% of the vote, thus being strong regional players with great potential nationally.

People are free to make whatever comments here but it would be good if people could at least be a little informed.

by Citoyen Fri Mar 26, 2004 18:11

What I want to know is what are a bunch of basically decent skins such as the Rifondazione Communista and the PDS doing hanging around with the fascistic, sectarian murder gang in a soft left, centrist, populist sugar coating that is the Pinheads today.
The workers of Germany and Italy are not fools - they won't like to see their parties hanging around with the death cult that brought us Bloody Friday, Kingsmills, Birmingham, La Mon, Enniskillen and all the other countless atrocities.
The good voters of Dublin and Northern Ireland will see them off in June. And when their innocent little venture into electoral politics goes sour, God knows what mayhem they'll wreck probably among themselves first before they turn on the rest of us.

by KC (Kellys Cellar) and the Sunshine band Fri Mar 26, 2004 18:24

None of those atrocities ever happened, Gerry said so and what's more he was never a member of an illegal organisation.
And for that matter Bobby Tohill just happened to get involved in a bar brawl with people on the way to a rave (hence the boiler suits) with a van parked out the side.
History its great when you make it up as you go along.

by Hebe Fri Mar 26, 2004 18:40

I think you will find that Euro Left parties have a better understanding of anti imperialism than citoyen. If you are looking for fascist mind sets & ethnic cleansing then look no further than your beloved Loyalists.

If you want ethnic cleansing on a grand scale then look no further than Britain. Ever hear of the British Empire and the Ethnic Cleansing & Genoicide it carried out across the globe?

Hitler learned everything he knew from the Brits. Who invented the Concentration Camp? The British, during the Boer War.

by Palmiro Togliatti Fri Mar 26, 2004 18:40

The provisional Republican movement, although you may have missed this, have been maintaining a ceasefire for quite a few years now and have played a pretty important role in promoting political progress in the North. Certainly, before that, they were responsible for some awful atrocities. So if you believe nobody can ever change their spots, I can see why you might object to them.

But in that case, why would you call the PDS 'basically decent skins'? These people ran a police state for five decades where anybody who dared to object to their regime was lucky to get away with being beaten up and was more likely to end up locked up for years, and those who wanted to get away to live in relative freedom were shot down like dogs. In 1953 when the workers of East Germany rebelled they were slaughtered.

I would suggest that if you're willing to be tolerant of the PDS, you should extend the same understanding to the Sinners.

by observer Sat Mar 27, 2004 04:22

That's the sound of jealousy. The Republicna Movement has had intimate links with the seriosu international revolutionary movement - with all its faults - for a long time - the comic book revolutionaries of the micro left can only mas*******e over such things. While the trots wank over 1917, republicans get on with it. Ask the Colombians.....

by Tom Shelley Sat Mar 27, 2004 04:42 Boulder, CO USA

Some quick examples (hardly an exhaustive list) of SF's connections with the Left:

1) Ken Livingstone and Tony Benn have been very friendly with SF.

2) The ANC. SF and the ANC have for at least a couple decades had a great relationship- this extends back to before the ANC began implementing neo-liberal economic policies.

3) Bill Fletcher Jr. (former senior official in the AFL-CIO, current co-chair of the Black Radical Congress and President of TransAfrica Forum) is a SF supporter.(although lately I don't think he's done much on it and he is somewhat critical of recent trends in SF towards the center).

Tom

by 17/05/74 Sat Mar 27, 2004 06:02

I notice 'Citoyen' was very selective in the bombings he/she mentioned. Totally ignored the massacres in Dublin and Monaghan carried out by Loyalists with the active assistance of the British intelligence services, on 17th May 1974. That was the largest massacre during the "troubles".

by dig deeper Sat Mar 27, 2004 15:50

Yes, the loyalists and the British were responsible in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. But what of the bombs in Sackville Place which were used to help pass an amendment to the Offences Against The State Act. Now we could put that down to the Loyalists, & British Intelligence, but could elements of the southern establishment have been responsible in that case? Who stood to benefit most?

by leftie Sat Mar 27, 2004 20:33

"1) Ken Livingstone and Tony Benn have been very friendly with SF.

2) The ANC. SF and the ANC have for at least a couple decades had a great relationship- this extends back to before the ANC began implementing neo-liberal economic policies.

3) Bill Fletcher Jr. (former senior official in the AFL-CIO, current co-chair of the Black Radical Congress and President of TransAfrica Forum) is a SF supporter.(although lately I don't think he's done much on it and he is somewhat critical of recent trends in SF towards the center)."

Oh yeh and they once met a guy with badges...they talked to a guy who knew somebody who read a book about Mark and some of them are left handed

by observer Sun Mar 28, 2004 03:05

No. He was taliking about real people not the wierdoes who hang around with the SP claiming to represent the workers of the Ukraine!!!

by Chris Sun Mar 28, 2004 21:37 derryfield at yahoo dot com

The fundementalist one true church mentality that dominates so many in the orthodox Trotskyist community serves nothing but to alienate people from revolutionary socialist politics.
Sinn Fein, like any other party or movement, is not perfect. But to suggest that they are right-wing, bourgeoisie, or whatever is nothing but petty minded sectarianism.
Sinn Fein links with left wing revolutionary nationalist movements internationally is extensive and well documented. Sinn Fein members have been extensively targeted for assassination by state agents. Therefore to be a publically known Sinn Fein activist can be quite dangerous and requires a ceretain degree of courage. One has to wonder if under similar circumstances SP activists would be up to the challenge.
It should come as no surprise that in respect to their attitudes toward Sinn Fein and Republicans the SP differs little from the DUP. The veneer is different but beneath it lies the same dogmatic, sectarian fundementalism.

by Paddy X Mon Mar 29, 2004 01:36

This whole thread is highly peculiar. Two of Ireland's leading intellectuals,-Eoghan Harris and Ruth Dudley Edwards,-never tire of pointing out that Sinn Fein is Fascist.. These two great intellects have sterling political backgrounds. How could they possibly be mistaken in believing that Sinn Fein is fascist? Or is the proposed Sinn Fein alliance with the Euro-Left groupings merely a cover for their Fascism?

by Tom Shelley Mon Mar 29, 2004 06:50 tshelley75 at comcast dot net Boulder, CO USA

First, Hi to Chris- sorry I haven't been contacting you. You make good points.

Below is a letter I typed up before the 02 26County general election. It wasn't published in either the Irish Times or News, nor was an edited shorter version.

Tom

Editor,

I was shocked and disapointed by the comments made by Irish Labour Party leader Ruari Quinn about the alleged similarities between Sinn Fein and the French National Front. I am a major supporter of Sinn Fein, but I am also a member of the American section of the Socialist International and with a few exceptions I offer solidarity to our fraternal brothers and sisters across the globe. Because they are not socialist and they accomodate British imperialism in Ireland, I have no problem saying that I don't support the SDLP. But I had felt that, because of the electoral system and parliamentary government in the Republic, I could support both SF and Labour, and although I hadn't looked into Labour very closely, I had a feeling that it was much better than the SDLP.

But Mr. Quinn's comments disgust me. I understand there are going to be disagreements between them and SF; and I understand that even with proportional representation, in some areas SF and Labour will cost one another a seat. But if you look at their policies, Labour has much more in common with SF than they do with FF or FG. They should be, as much as possible, trying to establish a friendly relationship with SF, which isn't helped by accusations of fascism.

First, SF is not a fascist party at all. Their left-wing democratic socialist credentials are well established. Their economic policies call for, for example, a NHS-type health-care system, and progressive taxation; as feminists they are one of the more pro-choice parties in Ireland (especially compared to the SDLP who are extremely pro-life) and support publicly funded child-care; in general their policies are socialist. About half of their candidates in this election have some connection to the trade-union movement. In the North, McGuiness' work in promoting integrated education has been praised by Mr. Quinn; McGuiness is also leading the charge against a two-tiered education system which has harmed working-class kids whatever their religion/national identity. SF has demonstrated it's willingness to talk with ANYONE in the interests of reconciliation and justice and have frequently talked with the working-class socialist Progressive Unionist Party.

Internationally SF has excellent relations with the African National Congress and the Cuban government, hardly fascist-friendly organizations. In the British Labour Party their biggest supporters are left-wingers Ken Livingstone, Kevin McNamara, and Tony Benn. They also have a very good relationship with the PLO.

SF has been involved in anti-racist activism in Ireland. They aren't perfect, but for the most part they support gay rights. SF Youth members were among those a couple years ago who physically prevented Holocaust-denier David Irvine from speaking in Cork.

Quinn suggests that SF's nationalism is akin to the kind that lead to World War I and to German Nazism in World War II, and the nationalism of people like Le Pen and Haider. This is ridiculous. Nationalism, or at least most varieties of it, is a legitimate response to imperialism. The six north-eastern counties of Ireland remain under the control of an imperialist power that occupied all of Ireland for 700 years during which it enslaved, killed, starved, exploited, impoverished and abused the indigenous population. I assume Mr. Quinn believes the War of Independence was justified. Why does he believe that while the indigenous Irish in the 26 counties deserved their freedom and that fighting for it was justified, but those in the North don't deserve freedom and aren't justified in fighting for it? The statelet of N.I. was created based on how much of Ireland the British could hold onto within which there would be a pro-British majority for the forseeable future- it was gerrymandered. The state was also created with sectarian violence and the suppression of democracy. For 50 years it was effectively a fascist dictatorship based on religious chauvanism, Jim-Crow (segregation in the US) social policies, and the interests of the (Unionist) commercial and land-owning classes. Direct rule changed things around a bit, but I wouldn't say it improved much. The Irish have a right to national self-determination without outside interference. Partition denies them this, and while most people in the Republic aren't affected by it, the Nationalist population of the North has experienced a nightmare similar to Apartheid or Israeli Occupation.

SF's answer to this is to call for a democratic process of building a new Ireland. They want the British state and it's military out of Ireland, but want at the same time to engage in dialogue with northern Irish Protestants to break down the barriers of sectarianism, ignorance and mis-trust. They want ALL the Irish people, including those who are descended from other nations, to discuss what kind of United Ireland they want to build. Although there are some non-socialist tendencies in SF, they're pretty clear that they want an Ireland based on some kind of democratic socialism. And they envision Ireland playing a positive, anti-imperialist role in the international community in partnership with progressive elements.

This is NOT fascism or right-wing nationalism.

I hope Mr. Quinn's comments were simply an ill-thought product of frustration about the electoral situation facing his party. Although I realize there are obstacles, which might end up being insurmountable, I hope Labour and SF can develop a friendly and cooperative relationship. I hope they BOTH do well in the election.

I would ask Mr. Quinn to consider retracting his statement.

Tom Shelley

by manus Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:47

Many of the parties in the UEN primary policy is nationalistic, in the same way that SF is.

They are also anti-EU integration, as is SF.

These are the two traits that keep this group together.

But the main reason for the existance of the UEN group, is soley to form a working group, so to avail of speaking time in EP and to gain positions on the relevant parlimentary committiees, as well as other perks and facilities in the EP. This is similar to what SF has done in Dail Eireann.

It is well know that the UEN group dosn't even have group meetings or a group congress, as do all the other EP groups, in order for form policy.

With two months to the election, SF has not given us any idea what Group they will join.

My bets are on them being non-aligned, for the short term anyhow. But there will be a lot of jockying after the election, especially with the new eastern members, the formation of groups could change and indeed new groups could be formed.

But we also have SNP and Plaid Cymru in the Greens, and in my view SF are more Left than these nationalist parties. Would the Irish Greens put an objection to SF joining, while at the same time being part of a technical group in the Dail? But then again does the new pro-EU (or less EU critical) approach now been taken by the Greens sit well with SF.

by Labour/OIRA watch Mon Mar 29, 2004 12:55

"They are also anti-EU integration, as is SF."

As were most of the front bench of the Labour party until they accepted that There Is No Alternative to capitalism.
Thankfully millions throughout the world disagree.

by manus Mon Mar 29, 2004 13:36

Yes, many in the LP have no or little left wing ideological vision and have accepted EU integration and the capitalist system as inevitable.

But many have been critical of further EU integration and this can be seen in approach of the party grass roots to Nice 1&2. Very little canavasing in favour of the referendum. Indeed a number of constituencies openly opposed the partys' position.

by Observer in Germany Mon Mar 29, 2004 14:02

>I may have the initials the wrong way round >but there are two left parties in Germany.

Of course this assertion requires an extremely generous definition of a "left" party, and interestingly you didn't say which of these groups you are working with

>The Social Democrats and the Democratic >Socialists. The first are in government and >have dominated the labourist left in >Germany since the start of the 20th century.
Hardly true during the time of the Weimar republic when the KPD were also a significant force on the left, getting around 15% of the national vote and were stronger than the SPD in some places


>While the Democratic Socialists have about 6% nationally,

They've been below the 5% threshold required for parliamentary representation in every survey I've seen since the last election.
4% is a more accurate figure.

>in regional areas like Saxony they hold >about 40% of the vote
22% at the last election in Saxony.
40% - 22% - bit of a difference there. I know of no place in Germany where the PDS have 40%.


>thus being strong regional players with >great potential nationally.
Not really. Their role in carrying through massive social cuts in the states of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Berlin, where they are in a coalition government with the SPD, have made most people open there eyes about the PDS.
In the west, they have always been a neglible force, with never more than about 2 or 3 percent.
Their attempt the expand westward has completely failed, they missed the 5% threshold at the last general election, and after years of constantly improving results, their results even in the east have started to stagnate, as they reveal their true colours when they get into power.
The PDS are a spent force, moving further and further to the right.

>People are free to make whatever >comments here but it would be good if >people could at least be a little informed.

Absolutely. Particularly the people opening discussions on topics they are not fully informed on. That's why I'm trying to fill the gaps in your knowledge of german politics, so you can finally give us an answer to the question why Sinn Féin is interested in working with this party.
So, any chance of an answer Eoin?

by Cllr Eoin O'Broin - Sinn Féin Tue Mar 30, 2004 15:35 eoinobroin at hotmail dot com

Thanks for that information. The figures I quoted on the PDS came from their own web site and the UEL/GNL web site. It clearly is a little dated.

SF has relations with parties within the UEL/GNL group, we also have relations with some of the Green parties, the progressive nationalists in the Free European Alliance and some sections of the Socialist group. We are interested in working with all of these people, as they are on the progressive end of the political spectrum.

The logic of working with any of these parties is to build alliances in order to advance our own national and EU agenda.This means working with people who may not have the same agenda on all issues, but who are in a general sense left wing, progressive and conducive to the republican socialist agenda.

The tone of your comment seems to suggest that we shouldnt be working with any of these people. If that is your position then I dont agree with it.

Im also not convinced with your assesment of the PDS, clearly they are experiencing a period of electoral decline but the jury is out on whether it is terminal.

On the KPD issue, your are right to an extent, but the SPD were in reality the dominant force on the left, even throughout this period, monopolising support amongst the organised working class, whereas the KPD support base was more among the unemployed.

Finally my point about being well informed was directed at people whose comments werent simply incorrect (we all make mistakes) but those whose ideas were simply off the wall.

by reminding ye all. Tue Jun 15, 2004 22:23

5º international of blaa blaa blaa ECO-blaa blaaa.
oh and the Catalans want their language thing sorted.
& the euro-market wants an Irish Braveheart sort of movie.
have a think about it.