Irish election: Downturn in workers struggle means Teflon Bertie rides again

by Socialist - SY - Purely PERSONAL Capacity Fri Jun 01, 2007 17:37

"Despite the loss of the one seat held by Joe Higgins of the Socialist Party, the small socialist movement’s vote was not insignificant in numerical terms...What did render it insignificant was the politics of the candidates. Localism and electoralism meant that what we got was a left gloss on the dominant capitalist programme."

Sorry, what now? The socialist party's election material and stance was a 'left gloss' on capitalism? I'm sorry, you're going to have to run that by me again. What part of arguing for rational & democratic planning for peoples needs, not the rule of big builders, developers, speculators and capitalists, what part of that is capitalist?

Not only did the SP explicitly call for socialism in its election material, it put no faith in any of the other parties, it argued people must organise and fight in work & communities, it put forward socialist solutions to all the major issues facing working class people, it kept a clear class outlook. Also, there was a long article explaining, in detail, what socialism is. This was "a left gloss on the dominant capitalist programme"?

Again reading your articles is like wadding through so much human excrement. It appears you didin't read the election material of the SP. It also appears the simple task of planning what ur going to say and then saying it in a logical order escapes you. I normally enjoy reading some of the articles other groups come out with such as ISN, SWP, CPGB, workers power, sparts etc come out with but this is just throwing words on paper, word filled with spite and class anger, yes, but not in any logical order.

by Another socialist Fri Jun 01, 2007 17:52

Don't worry about it socialist - everyone knows that Socialist Democracy are a particularly shameless group of sectarian cranks - they have no interest in the truth, they just invent whatever lies they please so they can attack other left groups for non-existent views. Most people would think it wise to criticise people for the views they actually hold and the things they actually do in the real world, but don't try telling that to Socialist Democracy. In their crazy little sectworld, 2+2+5, Joe Higgins is the left wing of the bourgeoisie and the Irish working class is sure to follow the lead of John McAnulty if only he denounces every other socialist in Ireland. Remember - if these lads ran in any consituency, north or south, they might just about get one vote if they remembered to vote for themselves

by Dub Fri Jun 01, 2007 19:11

Social Democracy must be one of the most bizarre left wing groups that exist in this country. This statement must the the product of a warped mind.

by Leninist Democracy watch Fri Jun 01, 2007 21:36

"Remember - if these lads ran in any consituency, north or south, they might just about get one vote if they remembered to vote for themselves"

If Socialist Democracy ran a candidate, they'd bring out a 20 page pamphlet giving reasons not to vote for them.

by john McA - SD Sat Jun 02, 2007 01:57

I did not write an article about the left vote in Dublin or about Joe Higgens losing his seat. From my point of view that's not what's important about this election. The reaction in the North and the defeat of the Nurses are major issues as is the more general collapse of working class opposition.

I have read the SP manifesto and I am willing to explain why, although I would have no trouble supporting many of the demands, I do not consider the programme on which the SP fought the election a socialist one. Of course, that's only if someone wants a rational debate.

The issue is important in the sense that the rest of the left have adopted the SP method just as it failed. If you now decide that the method is fundamentally sound the logical conclusion for the next round of elections will be that PBP have got it right and that you were far too left-wing for your own good.

By that time you get that far we really will be inhabiting parallel universes

by Dub Sat Jun 02, 2007 15:19

Please outline what was un-socialist about the SP manifesto. They clearly called for a socialist tansformation of society. ISN were also clearly socialist in their election campaign. In fairness, if you looked at the results you would see that despite the squeeze of small parties Joe Higgins was only 250 transfers away from taking a seat in a 3 seater which should be a 4 seater. If 250 more people put Higgins ahead of Burton you would not even come out with this rubbish. Social Democracy are the ones with quite a watered down programme. I remember that you supported UN intervention in Iraq in 2003.

by tony Sat Jun 02, 2007 21:27

How did Socialist democracy do in the elections with their revolutionary programme?

by Gearoid O Loingsigh Sat Jun 02, 2007 21:52

I don't know what this rubbish about UN intervention is. SD never argued for UN intervention and has been quite consistent in opposing it everywhere. SD has never seen the UN as a legitimate body, in teh Iraq invasion SD said that even if the UN security council authorised the invasion, it should be opposed, unlike other left groups that talked about an illegal war SD pointed out that the capitialist legality of the war was completely irrelevant.

by JMA - SD Sun Jun 03, 2007 13:12

Thanks for the rather more moderate tone, even if linked to an inaccuracy about our policy. From a Marxist point of view the SP manifest is clearly a social democratic manifesto. It is not about an alternative society but about how to improve the current one. While we support improvements we do not support reformism, the idea that the current society can be gradually transformed into a better one. The call for community police is not one that Marxist could support. The issue of method is also important. The way to change society is by putting Joe and Claire in the Dail. Again the standard Marxist view is that parliaments can be used as platforms, but are not vehicles for revolutionary change.

As I said before, my main issue lies outside the current left in looking at the broad trends in the election. From this prespective my main interest was the SP view of the Nurses strike. Their leaflet says they condemn the HSE as agents of government policy. But what happened is that the nurses were strangled by the National Implementation body - that is by the Trade Union bureaucracy acting through social partnership.

The fact that the entire left remained silent negates all of their electoral intervention as far as I am concerned.

By the way, before the usual yahoos get stuck in, the above views are not the result of my ingesting substances unavailable to the rest of you, but the bread and butter of standard debate between the CWI and other socialist currents extending over decades. Read it up for yourselves.

by SP member (personal capacity) Sun Jun 03, 2007 13:36

JMA says: "From a Marxist point of view the SP manifest[o] is clearly a social democratic manifesto. It is not about an alternative society but about how to improve the current one."

SP manifesto said: "The only alternative to the system of capitalism is socialism. Under socialism wealth would be owned and democratically controlled by the majority of people and would be used to provide for the needs of everyone in society."

JMA says: "The call for community police is not one that Marxist could support."

SP manifesto said: "The Socialist Party stands for democratic community controlled police services. To cut across anti-social behaviour, investment in the educational, economic and leisure needs of young people is urgently needed." Not exactly just 'community' coppers under control of State!

JMA says: "The issue of method is also important. The way to change society is by putting Joe and Claire in the Dail. Again the standard Marxist view is that parliaments can be used as platforms, but are not vehicles for revolutionary change."

SP leaflet says "Clare Daly will use the Dáil as a platform to continue to organise people in the communities and the workplaces to fight on all these issues"

JMA says: "Their leaflet [on Nurses' strike] says they condemn the HSE as agents of government policy. But what happened is that the nurses were strangled by the National Implementation body - that is by the Trade Union bureaucracy acting through social partnership."

SP manifesto said "Full support for the nurses. Pay the wage claim and implement the 35-hour week" it also went on to say "End 'social partnership'."

by John McNutty Sun Jun 03, 2007 15:30

You don't understand, SP comrade - it's not necessary for anything that SD says to be based on reality. John McAnulty just needs to consult his imagination and that's that. You may have spent the last decade telling people that having Joe Higgins in the Dail is just a way to organise activism outside parliament, but John says you didn't so that's the end of the discussion. Seriously, you might as well ignore him, you'll just get more lies back in his reply and on and on ... there must be something good on the telly

by Dub Sun Jun 03, 2007 18:54

What is John McAnulty's view on his comrades in Brazil going into government with sell-out Lula? And in Italy they cheer-lead Prodi. Last time I checked the Brazilian government are a capitalist administration that are by no means socialist or anything near it. Next thing Socialist Democracy will be going into Government with Ahern as he's from a working class background.

by Gearoid O Loingsigh Sun Jun 03, 2007 19:29

Consult the website www.socialistdemocracy.org, there are quite a few documents there on Brazil etc.

by Dub Mon Jun 04, 2007 13:24

I note that SD initiated this thread to engage in rational discussion on this matter. They were then proven beyond doubt to be wrong about their claims and now they are avoiding discussion on their initial assertions and on their comrades' record in Brazil and Italy.

by JMcA - SD Mon Jun 04, 2007 16:49

Nearly everything Dub has said so far has been wrong. I did not ‘initiate’ debate. I posted an analysis, clearly labelled ‘other press’ that became the subject of hysterical and sectarian attack around a footnote. I offered to debate the issue rationally and Dub did moderate the language but has since made a whole series of statements about our policy that are completely the opposite of what we believe and could be corrected at the click of a mouse by using the search facility on our website.

As I understand the state of play the substantial issue is if we have grounds for considering the SP programme to be social-democratic or not. You either engage with that or give it a rest.

SP member – it is not that I am not familiar with your policy or that I misunderstand transitional demands. I have in fact discussed policy with members of your organisation over many years. Our view is that calls for community police cannot be transitional demands and are the product of reformism. We believe that the main challenge that a regrouped workers movement would face would come from the police and legal system and that this would outweigh by thousands of times any threat from demoralised elements. The police cannot be made into a neutral force. Any attempt to do so means engagement with the police and therefore a form of support.

I’m not making theoretical points here – I live in an area of Belfast with a high level of demoralisation and anti-social behaviour and my family has suffered along with others in our neighbourhood, but I have also been beaten by the state forces and jailed under emergency legislation. I know which represents the greatest force.

by Sectnerd Mon Jun 04, 2007 18:17

Now now Dub, you're just making yourself look silly with inaccurate accusations like that. A) it's well known that Socialist Democracy have little enough in common with the "mainstream" of the USFI and B) the USFI itself has come down strongly against both the Lula and Prodi governments, supporting the Brazilian comrades who broke with the PT to form the PSOL (along with the CWI's Brazilian comrades, I think) and organising an international campaign in support of their Italian member who was expelled by the PRC for voting against Prodi's foreign policy.

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1262

http://www.internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1255

Much better to concentrate on addressing the inaccurate claims SD have made about the Socialist Party's positions than throw mud which won't stick.

by EU&Lowpaidworkers Mon Jun 04, 2007 19:01

Did anyone listen to James Whale & George Galloway on Talksport London last night . Somebody telephoned to say that england employers now have to employ t he EU members who are seeking work ( did anyonelisten to it)

by John Mon Jun 04, 2007 21:06

So is it Socialist Democracy's position to wait until the working class become ready to crush capitalism and implement socialism before they become active in workers struggles?

Socialists must fight along with other workers at all times. In the current period it is inevitable that workers will be primarily be fighting for reforms of capitalism.. bin tax, water tax, better pay, against corrupt planning etc. Socialists have to be active in these struggles while also linking in these struggles with the need to fight capitalism itself. This is exactly what the SP are doing and exactly what SD are not. SD are completely inactive and in reality have given up on the working class.

by pdtd Mon Jun 04, 2007 23:10

There is nothing "wrong" with the SP manifesto. There is nothing wrong with believing that everything should be nationalized. There is nothing wrong in believing that Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky, Kim il Jong, Bob Mugabe, and James Connolly have all the answers to every social and economic question. There is nothing wrong in believing in the tooth-fairy (no jokes about gay dentists, please) and Santa.

Problem is that almost no one any more actually believes that the aforesaid long dead gents and their (slightly) less dead followers have a blind bit of relevance in a small open economy in the age of info-tech. Mind you, Santa and the Tooth-Fairy do have their uses from time to time.

If the SP wishes to win the next election it should junk the first word in its moniker and adopt centrist policies. Otherwise it could just wait for world revolution to happen (after all, Karl Marx said WR was inevitable, so it must be.....)

by Sectnerd Tue Jun 05, 2007 13:15

"There is nothing wrong in believing that Karl Marx, Leon Trotsky, Kim il Jong, Bob Mugabe, and James Connolly have all the answers to every social and economic question. "

I'm afraid you're going to have to try better than that chum(p). As anyone with the least bit of knowledge about them knows, the SP has always condemned Stalinist dictators like Kim Il Jong. Since "social and economic questions" are heavily influenced by the fact that we live in a capitalist society, and Karl Marx remains by far the most intelligent and capable analyst of the capitalist system, the SP are quite right to believe that you can learn a few things from looking at his work. Your post is about as profound as if I was to say "sure Fianna Fail believe that the Holocaust was a good thing and want all single mothers to be beheaded in public squares". The fact that you have to resort to such obvious, easily dealt with lies merely suggests that you have absolutely nothing of any substance to say against the Socialist Party. Still bitter cos Mike McDowell lost his seat are we? "Cheerio, cheerio, cheerio!" Great stuff