SWP local election candidates disappear

by Kerry maid Fri Apr 23, 2004 21:19

It's not surprising that McNulty bowed out because he has no local profile in the area. He's a blow-in who hasn't developed roots. His attempt to stand as an 'anti-war candidate' was never going to work because he hardly enjoys the confidence of everybody active locally. He's acted in a typical SWP manner within the anti-war group.

by Not exactly inconsolable Fri Apr 23, 2004 21:38

It's pretty obvious why McNulty isn't standing anymore. He had nobody to help him run a campaign. I gather that Cronin had much the same problem, two other active members of the SWP and no support from anti-bin tax activists in her part of the city. I can't see why Roche is gone though. Has he had a falling out with SWP high command?

by John Fri Apr 23, 2004 21:54

McNulty is not exactly what one would describe as a steady ship. No surprise there.

by Kev Fri Apr 23, 2004 22:01

Why don't the swp have candidates in Galway and Cork? I know they have a prominent member in Galway in Orla Ni Chomhrai. Don't know if they have anybody in Cork (never heard tell) but you'd expect candidates in those two cities and Limerick and Waterford. Why isn't Orla (or some other Galwegian) running and why nobody in Cork?

Just curious.

by Answergirl Fri Apr 23, 2004 22:21

They don't have any members in Limerick so they could hardly run there.

Their Galway and Cork operations involve only a handful of people. They are too weak to run an electoral campaign in either of those cities. They tried to run in Cork in the last General Election and not only finished behind the Immigration Control Platform, they actually got one of the lowest votes for any candidate in the state. Even the SWP can learn from experience once in a while.

The only surprise is Waterford where they have a functioning branch even if it is very small.

by Dub SWP - swp Sat Apr 24, 2004 01:05

HA ha ha HA. You people just get better and better. Never have I heard such a load of navel gazing sectarian crap. Get a life.The SWP will be around and fighting Capitalism a lot longer than the rest of you idiotic cyber sectarians!!
as for DC in Dundrum, if any of you fools knew the area and the work she did you would not have the cheek to attack her record, (By the way th SPer who posted this will have to do better, people in Dundrum know DC not Lm, votes will unfortunately prove that )
but of course facts get in the way of a good rant so just continue with the "they did nothing while we fought the bin tax" bullshit.
At least you will convince each other.

by observer Sat Apr 24, 2004 02:20

Every Sp and sWp and other micros standing against SF are idiots or/state agents. Shun them like the plague!

by Got a life Sat Apr 24, 2004 02:22

Well drunken SWP member I know in your sad state what you have said sounds credible but tomorrow morning when you wake up the idea that Deirdre Cronin will do better than Lisa Maher in the elections will just seem silly. So good night silly drunken person xxx

by observer Sat Apr 24, 2004 10:25

What makes the SP think that Maher will do well in Dundrum? Her transfers may help SF to take the seat if they do not get in on the first count but other than that she will be a minor actor in the election.

by Naithi Sat Apr 24, 2004 13:02

I think there could be a bit of a surprise when people wake up on the 12th of June and look at the Dundrum election results.

by Whywhy!! Sat Apr 24, 2004 14:04

Why do the SWP still run a load of paper candidates all over the place. If the SWP were serious about winning a council seat some place they would concentrate on 2 or three areas in these elections and really do it properly. FOr example why don't they concentrate on Dun Laoghaire and Ballyfermot and get all the SWP members from the South to blitz the place for 3-4 weeks. That is how they will get a respectable vote.

I really dispare that the SWP are incapable of learning the lessons from there past mistakes and from the SP's success.

by SWPwatcher - none Sat Apr 24, 2004 23:31

Urgent. spotted two well known members of the SWP in a cafe today. I cant be sure but I think they were drinking coffee. What does this mean. We have a right to know!!. They will never be trusted by the rest of us until we find out .One of them said hello. Leninist fool!!Who do you think you are kidding Mr Allen.!!

by Watching you Sun Apr 25, 2004 11:50

We can be certain that Dub SWP is a bone-fide member – the reference to “cyber sectarians” is a real giveaway in any SWP posting. Also somewhat contradictory, given that SWP members are clearly not averse to the Internet. Nevertheless, I expect this cyber comment to make an appearance in the forthcoming “Things General Secretary Kieran Once Said”. Why else would every SWP member faithfully repeat such an inanity?

One other thing’s certain: the SWP might as well give up beyond the Pale. It simply has no support beyond its own ranks, which is as it should be given its inability to work with others on the left.

by SWPwatcher - none Sun Apr 25, 2004 13:34

Could not agree more, I know for a fact that they have no members in Termonfeckon, and not so much as a paper drop in Baltinglass.We now need a complete list of there national membership as well as open access to all there leadership meetings. Again I say We have a right to know.

by SWatcher Sun Apr 25, 2004 21:43

The dogs on the streets of Ballybrack are all talking about the imminant 'disappearence' of Christy Moore from the imfamous SWP election website.

I wonder if we will ever get an explanation of the real reasons why Christy, Deirdre, John and Dick aint standing..

Of course for the SWP the Ballybrack ward is a bit of a stronghold, by all accounts they consider it their 'Vyborg'. The SWP leadership wont want to see their 134 votes going away to the reformist left so are busy searching the Dun Laoghaire area for possible candidates, rumour has it the SWP's very own Clonakilty Pudding, Dave 'the Bomber' Lordan might take the crown.

by In Stitches Sun Apr 25, 2004 23:12

That's genius!

by just looked Mon Apr 26, 2004 14:27

just went to the swp website. christie moore is gone, dave lorden is now the candidate in ballybrack. there is no information on dave's record, manifesto, issues, etc. on the site yet.

by Major Woody Mon Apr 26, 2004 14:37

Wow an accurate rumor on indymedia (Christie ->Dave). Anyone able to predict who vanishes next?

More to the point, what is going on here? Did the smallest mass party in the world announce candidates without actually asking them first if they were willing to run?

by Astonished Mon Apr 26, 2004 15:10

That's four down. Remember Christy Moore never existed. You will all vote pudding.

by Dodo Mon Apr 26, 2004 20:39

The worst thing about all this is that the SWP have been busy at public meetings all around Dun Laoghaire Rathdown declaring that they were definitly standing Deirdre and Christy and calling on people to vote for them. Then all of a sudden without explanation they pull out Deirdre and Christy and put in Christy's place Dave Lordan (who did absolutely nothing on the bin tax or other local issues). Can the SWP not see why they are not taken seriously by ordinary people?? Will they ever learn the lessons of their past mistakes?? It seems they are incapable of it. The SWP's intervention into the elections is not building any respect for their party or acting as a boost to the anti bin tax campaign. All it has doen so far is make the SWP look like foolish fly by nights.

by John Fitz - none Tue Apr 27, 2004 01:03 Dublin

Oh my god , this so interesting. A party has changed its candidates!!! what next. Surely this is some massive, evil leninist plot. I agree, we have a right to know!!
This is way more important than stuff like Mayday,Bush visit ,
Should be the first thing on the newswire.At least until we can mock the number of votes they get. That will be sooo interesting to hear as well.

by Dubliner Tue Apr 27, 2004 12:44

I am amazed at the SWP are running against Diarmuid Neassans in the local elections. With all their talk of 'socialist bloks' and 'left unity' why are they running against the socialist Party? They even say on thier leaflets that Brendan Donoghue is "the Socialist Candidate for the South West Inner City". This is amazing double speak from the SWP. They say they're for a socialist block but then do another thing. I hope that Brenda Donoghue stands down in the interests of left unity and getting a good vote for the anti-bin tax campaign.

by Pedant Tue Apr 27, 2004 13:18

Diarmuid Neassans - Socialist?
I thought Socialists believed in democracy.

by Commentator Tue Apr 27, 2004 14:34

It really is not that interesting if a party changes its candidates but it is of newsworthiness if they catagorically say in front of people at public meetings that they are standing a particular candidate and then don't give any explanation when they change that candidate or decide no to stand at all.

On The SW Inner City ward, the SWP standing Donohoe is in order to protect a 'Brid Smith' vote, SW Inner City is in Brid's Dail constituency. I find this think very strange from the SWP as to be elected a TD you need about 4,500-5,500 1st preferences, the max Brid could have got in the SW Inner City ward was about 100-150. Standing against Des Derwin in SIPTU and in NIPSA shows how genuine the SWP are about 'left unity' and 'socialist blocks', the standing of Donohoe really just confirms to everyone the fact that the SWP are not genuine at all about their 'socialist block' idea, the SP are right to tell them to take a hike.

Regarding the SWP declaring all their candidates 'socialist candidates', this could find them in trouble with the law. The returning officer can give fines and even bar candidates from the election if they go about giving the impression they are in a party that they are not. The SWP candidates should describe themselves as 'the socialist worker candidate', not 'the socialist candidate' their slogan should be 'vote socialist worker' not 'vote socialist'.

by Krony Tue Apr 27, 2004 14:36

Can someone fromthe SWP please come on and tell us why have they pulled out of the race in Waterford, Tralee, Dundrum and why is Christy Moore not standing?

Another leadership purge??

by Dubliner Tue Apr 27, 2004 14:45

"Krony" is a gobshite. Candidates not running does not mean there are 'leadership purges'. In the cut and thrust of politics it's not always possible to run in particular areas.

I do think that the SWP do have to explain why they are standing against the Socialist Party in South West Inner City. This in addition to standing against Des Derwin in SIPTU shows that all their talk of socialist unity (both Derwin and Neassans are socialists) is rubbish. It will also be interesting to see if the Returning Officer will act against the SWP on their misleading "vote socialist" (ie it's an offence to say you are in a party you're not in, there already is a Socialist Party).

SWP need to answer why they are standing against a socialist in South West Inner City and why they stood against a Socialist in the SIPTU Vice President election.

by Curious Tue Apr 27, 2004 14:56

By the same token why are the SP standing against the SWP? The SP seem to think they already control a one party state.

by Stonger Tue Apr 27, 2004 15:23

Naessens has been very active in that area, unlike some so called 'anti bin tax co-ordinators' that the SWP are wheeling out now Naessens actually was the anti bin tax co-ordinator in the Liberties area. Naessens declared well before Donohoe, it is clearly Donohoe that is standing against Naessens. Naesens is the stronger candidate, on election day this will be proved, I will go and book my skiing holiday in Hell on the 12 of June if Donohoe out polls Naessens.

by SWatcher Tue Apr 27, 2004 15:39

The SWP list of candidates is more and more looking like a list of contestants on Big Brother, every week one is taken off, who is next?? Do people reckon Terry 'the shelver' Connolly will last long? I hear he might be the next one.

by Glass House Tue Apr 27, 2004 15:49

Didnt Joan Collins disappear from it? Now running as an independent along with another ex SPer Michael Gallagher.

by Copycat Tue Apr 27, 2004 17:11

So the SP has copyright now on the word socialist now eh? Not only are members constantly told that they are the One True Church now no one else can even use the word.

Of course the swimmies are trying to ride SPs relative success (relative that is to the SWP's disastrous innings so far) but only a fool would say that SP candidates alone can use the word socialist. Are Joan Collins, Ciaran Perry, John O Neill etc. not socialists? None of them will be depending on association with the SP to make progress.

Only the most dogmatic party hack would claim that the term 'socialist' can only be applied to their own organisation.

by Legal Eagle Tue Apr 27, 2004 17:32

Under the electoral acts it's an offence if you're a candidate to mislead the electorate into thinking that you are a member of a party you are not. It's illegal for an independent to mislead people into thinking he is a FFer, FGer, Labour etc etc.

This misleading can be done by having very similar designed posters and literature. This can be done by adopting slogans that suggest you are of another Party. The Socialist Party is registered as a political party under the name "The Socialist Party". It could be deemed misleading to call yourself "the socialist candidate" if you're not in the SP. It could be illegal for a SWP candidate to say they're a "labour candidate" even though they stand in the interests of working class people. It's not a question of the SP having a monopoly on being Socialists, it's a question of misleading people.

by Amused socialist Tue Apr 27, 2004 17:38

When you tire of socialism, you can go and join the legal profession and implement intellectual property rights for big business. You seem to have a talent for it.
You must be taking the piss or coming to the end of legal studies to come out with this nonsense.
It could be misleading to call yourself a socialist if you are in the Socialist Party.

by Legal Eagle Tue Apr 27, 2004 18:17

The SP have not got the monopoly on being socialists, the SWP have not got the monopoly on being Socialist Workers, The Green Party have not got the monopopy on being Green.

The point I was making it is illegal under the Electoral Acts to mislead people into thinking they may be in another party. The SWP candidates can call themselves socialists. No law against that. However if their literature is MISLEADING, ie "Vote for the Socialists" or "Join the Socialists" it may be illegal. The SWP candidates can call themselves green and environmentalist. However if their literature is MISLEADING, ie "Vote Green" or "Join the Greens" it may be illegal.

by pat c Tue Apr 27, 2004 18:20

any independent or other party candidate can also describe themselves as green or socialist. what they cannot do is say that they are SP or GP candidates unless they are so endorsed by those parties.

by Amused Socialist (TM) Tue Apr 27, 2004 18:24

Still think you are a muppet, who should fuck off.

"It could be deemed misleading to call yourself "the socialist candidate" if you're not in the SP."

Once more for the slow learners.
It could be misleading to call yourself a socialist if you are in the Socialist Party.

by Legal Eagle Tue Apr 27, 2004 18:25

anyone can call themselves Green or Socialist. BUT if they're misleading people then it's not right, and it's against the Electoral Acts. An independent can say he's Green. But if he puts "Vote Green" as the main slogan on his posters and literature then he may be open to action from the electoral authorities.

by Jim Mackintosh - The Voice/ Socialist Worker reader Tue Apr 27, 2004 20:12 Wicklow

Wouldn't it have been easier to form an alliance?

Why resort to arguments about the interpretation of bourgeois law?

Which policies exactly are so different, for voting purposes, which makes it necessary to run 2 socialist candidates in one constituency?

Or is the answer: SWP bad, SP good.

Before this argument about who has the right to the title "Socialist" loses its own sense of importance, I think we should remember the track record of "Socialist" parties in France and Spain and all the cuts they introduced against ordinary people.

It's just an approximation: it sums up something that these parties stand for and in Ireland "Socialist" parties haven't yet been in government. Both the SWP and the SP will tell you that real change will come from elsewhere (i.e. people power).

Elections are best used as a platform for socialist ideas. But to have 2 parties with the same policies oppose one another must be the height of sectarianism. I'm sure both sides are to blame. Maybe they'll get it right for the next elections in 2 years time.

In the meantime the pettiness has spiralled downwards with this argument about who is the "Socialist" party. Can't we come up with something more constructive?

by Jonno - SP (personal capacity) Tue Apr 27, 2004 20:41

Of course people have the right to call themselves socialists and whoever is anonymously talking about the Returning Officer is just stirring shit.

The Socialist Party in England was on the receiving end of some arbitrary decision along those lines when the authorities decided that they couldn't use the name "Socialist Party" on the ballot paper. Other left wing groups have occasionally been on the receiving end of such decisions and whoever our anonymous friend is he or she should know better than to even bring up the issue.

If imitation is a form of flattery, the Socialist Party was much flattered indeed by the SWP during the last general election and I'm sure we will be again in these local elections. But so what? We have our own campaigns to run, what the SWP get up to just isn't a very big deal.

Finally, on the issue of the South West Inner City ward, it was one of two areas where the SWP decided to stand weak candidates against stronger Socialist Party ones. Their candidate in the other area, Dundrum, now appears to have disappeared. I have no idea why they are persisting in running in the South West Inner City. Running against stronger left candidates is hardly a new thing for the SWP. Maybe they just enjoy the embarrasment.

by Dub swp - swp Tue Apr 27, 2004 23:33 dub

Might I suggest you ask your leadership why we are standing in some areas where your party is also standing. We asked for co operation and got nothing.
We have a good branch and a good candidate with a history of fighting on a range of issues from local strikes to health care.
As for those who feel we must ask permission to stand a candidate;wake up and take your sneering comments to where someone will give a fuck.
Lastly, and I now this will come as a huge dissapointment and most likely not be believed in some quarters, but candidate changes do not represent purges or evil plots... all are for genuine personal/political reasons that are none of anybodies business outside of the swp.

by Jonno Wed Apr 28, 2004 01:10

The thing is Dub-SWP that nobody will ever take your recent spate of appeals for "left unity" or "cooperation" very seriously at all when they are matched at every turn by crassly sectarian actions. On the very day you issued one of those appeals for socialists to get together, you also announced your decision to stand against Des Derwin in the SIPTU elections.

In these elections you announced your intention to stand candidates against stronger Socialist Party ones, although everyone is aware that you have no possibility of getting a better vote. That you accompany this behaviour with more empty appeals for unity is meaningless.

You have every right to stand candidates anywhere you want to - or in the cases of the people mentioned on this thread not stand. Others have every right to make clear their opinions of the choices you make. When you stand candidates who are guaranteed to get a very poor vote against other socialists, you can expect to encounter some negative views.

by Anti-War Activist Wed Apr 28, 2004 11:01

Don't ruin that lovely relationship that you have with the SWP in the IAWM.
The only ones propping up their front.

by Realist Wed Apr 28, 2004 12:20

Jonno told us that "The Socialist Party in England was on the receiving end of some arbitrary decision along those lines when the authorities decided that they couldn't use the name "Socialist Party" on the ballot paper."

That was because they stole the name! The Socialist Party of Great Britain (www.spgb.org.uk) has been around and contesting elections for 100 years. So the election authorities told the new SP to contest elections under another name, they chose 'Socialist Alternative'.

And didn't the SP here originally call their paper 'Socialist Voice' until the Communist Party of Ireland, who publish a bulletin called, wait for it - 'Socialist Voice', got a bit annoyed about this and suggested that legal action could follow unless the SP altered the name?

by Paul O'Hara Wed Apr 28, 2004 15:26

The Socialist Party of Great Britain are a tiny micro group that have not contested an election for many many years. The Socialist Party (note it is a different name to SPGB) regularly contests elections and has many councillors as well as former MPs.

I'd agree with Jonno when he says the SP should not really give a feck about the SWP going around trying to mislead people into thinking they are the SP. They shoudl really be flattered. The fact is that even if they do manage to fool some people into thinking they are the SP, they still will get terrible electoral results due to their fly by night tactics and approach to community campaigns. The practice of the SWP pretending to be the SP is highly dishonest, but people can see through it and all it does is make the SWP look bad.

By the way, it is my understanding that for the electoral authorities to take action against a particular candidate/party they must recieve a complaint from another candidate or party. I really can't see the SP taking the SWP to the courts over this issue.

by Copycat Wed Apr 28, 2004 15:55

Its really very simple, as Legal Eagle well knows. Anyone can call themselves 'the Socialist candidate' on their election literature because that is a description of the candidates ideology not party affiliation. Legal problems only arise if someone who is not an SP candidate descibes themselves as 'the Socialist Party candidate'. Trying to imply that they, as 'socialist candidates' are somehow linked to the SP by reference to Joe Higgins etc. (as the SWP when Higgins was jailed) is the height of opportunism but is not illegal. Anyway, I thought the SP regarded the state as an instument of bourgeois rule. A marxist organisation taking another left group to court over the use of the word 'socialist' ? So laughable it makes you want to cry!

Jonno's point is correct: why make a fuss about the SWP candidates when they are so irrelevent. Has you vanguardism so blinded you that you think working class people can't distinguish between some tosser spouting revolutionary slogans and a serious socialist candidate who has put in the work on the ground?

There's another contradiction at work here: SP condemn the SWP for calling themselves 'socialist candidates' but condemn Joan Collins and Ciaran Perry for not calling themselves 'socialist candidates' but community/anti-bin tax candidates. Can't have it both ways comrades.

by Jonno Wed Apr 28, 2004 15:58

Paul, you aren't quite right about the SPGB being a "tiny micro group". It actually has a few hundred members, although it is not an "activist" organisation and membership does not entail having to do anything. Joining in the first place is quite difficult but that is another story.

The SPGB is one of the more interesting and odd offshoots of the socialist movement, rejecting any kind of reform as "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic". It has been going for a century, steadfastly refusing to take part in any movement other than to explain from the sidelines that all action short of the imediate abolition of capitalism is ultimately pointless.

There is a clause in their constitution that insists that they have to be hostile to all other political parties. That apparently includes the other, identical, SPGB which split away from it a decade or so ago on the grounds that the main party was going soft.

The Socialist Party is of the view that there is room for an SP and an SPGB and an SSP an SWP and whatever other variations on the same theme arise. So too there is room for a Communist Party of Britain, a New Communist Party of Britain, a Communist Party of Great Britain and so on. Such confusion might be an occasional pain in the hole but it is better than having the state authorities sort out our rows for us. That goes for here as much as in Britain.

by Terance Wed Apr 28, 2004 16:35

Nobody in the SP has ever said that they would even consider taking the SWP through the capitalist courts for alleged 'misleading of the electorate'. If the SWP's strategy in this election is to try associate themselves with the SP; well fair play to them, it's dishonest and pathetic but why should the SP care, ordinary people can see through them.

by Ordinary Person Wed Apr 28, 2004 18:09

"ordinary people can see through them"

Are these ordinary people anything like those ordinary people in Mulhuddart or Corduff who have seen through the SP?

by Pat Paterson Wed Apr 28, 2004 18:22

There is not a single mention of the upcoming elections in the latest edition of the Socialist Worker. We'll have to wait another 2 weeks for any explaination, clarification etc.

by Pat Paterson Wed Apr 28, 2004 18:26

There is not a single mention of the upcoming elections in the latest edition of the Socialist Worker.

Here are quotes from Dave Lorden's leaflet:

"We support Dave's campaign
100% and we call on all who
oppose the bin tax to vote for him"
- Chris Potts and Christy Moore,
Co-ordinators for the Campaign
Against Service Charges in
Ballybrack and Loughlinstown

"If you support our fight against the
bin tax and for better public services
for all please vote for my party
Colleague Dave Lordan"
-Richard Boyd Barrett Chairman
Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown Campaign
against Service Charges and SWP
candidate for Dun Laoghaire ward

Chances are that Christy was not "purged" as he endorses Dave Lorden in the leaflet

by tandy Thu Apr 29, 2004 11:34

At least by putting quotes from people who actually are active in the bin tax campaign endorsing Dave on the leaflet the SWP are de facto acknowledging that Dave Lorden hasn't done a tap of work on bin tax and is essentially a party candidate.

by Michael Gallagher Sat May 15, 2004 21:33 mglibertypics at hotmail dot com 086 4048249

I suppose we're all entitled to an explanation. No, an explanation of their (SWP) existence would be more appropiate, but they don't really have one.

Volunteers wanted to help with the campaign of the only declared REVOLUTIONARY SOCIALIST. Contact above.

Check Event calander for my fundraisers on Sunday 30th May and Saturday 5th June.

by Paul O'Hara Sun May 16, 2004 14:53

Michael, it is often the case that those that proclaim their revolutionary credentials are not in practice very revolutionary. It's only the childish and infantile that usually tell everyone how revolutionary they are.

As for an explanation from the SWP, yes maybe we should get one about their last minute changes in Dun Laoghaire but I think we shoudl also get one fro you Michael. Why exactly did you leave the SP? Was it because they refused to endorse you as a candidate? Was it because you felt they were not as 'revolutionary' as you. If it is the former then you are a careerist, if it is the latter then can you please explain your position and actions more fully. Where are the communications that you made with the SP leadership, on what political basis did you leave?