Log in

View Full Version : ULA Ireland: Sectarian self-annihilation



l'Enfermé
25th October 2012, 18:14
http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation

ULA Ireland: Sectarian self-annihilation

The United Left Alliance has gone into destruct mode. Anne Mc Shane reports

http://cpgb.org.uk/assets/images/wwimages/ww935/SM_tds.jpg
Happier days: Clare Daly (left) with other ULA TDs and SP councillor Ruth Coppinger (centre)

With a draconian December budget looming, the Irish government is gearing up for yet another onslaught on our class. The necessity for strong working class leadership is critical in the struggles to come. There could not be a worse time for the United Left Alliance to go into meltdown. But it has.
You may not be surprised. The project was built on very shaky foundations, being yet another ‘halfway house’ of professed revolutionaries, including the two largest left groups, and a minority of reformists. The aim of the organisation from the outset was precisely to accommodate itself to the right. Being no exception to the rule, it has been the revolutionaries of the ULA who have reinvented themselves as tame reformists. Inevitably crisis ensues, as predictably one or another leading member is tempted too far down the road of populism. The Socialist Party’s crisis is close to home in the form of Clare Daly, long-time (now ex-) member of the SP and a ULA member of parliament (TD). The Socialist Workers Party meanwhile has seized the moment to make an even more marked turn to the right with the relaunch of the People before Profit Alliance (PBPA). As resignations multiply and splits develop, there is chaos, confusion and deep demoralisation.
As I have described in previous articles, the ULA programme, drawn up behind the scenes and presented as a fait accompli, was limited to the most minimal of reformist demands. The SWP refused to allow even the word ‘socialism’ to appear in the 2010 election programme or any document since. A number of very important social issues did not get a mention either. Abortion rights, a central question in Irish society, was avoided, no doubt because of concerns that it was a vote-loser. It has only been this year that the ULA has taken a stand, when to her credit Clare Daly and fellow ULA TD Joan Collins presented a bill to legalise limited abortion rights. Ironically the other main signatory of the bill was Mick Wallace, maverick independent TD and former property developer, who has been the apparent cause of Daly’s controversial exit from the SP.
Another problem from the outset was the determination of both main founding organisations, the SWP and SP, to restrict democracy. Both were deeply hostile to the prospect of organisational fusion, with the SP being the most reluctant. Therefore all decisions were made in private by the unelected national steering committee - after a tug of war between the two groups. It is only since April 2012 - when a group of non-aligned members was formed with the right of representation on the committee - that minutes have been circulated.
Behind the rhetoric of unity, the only thing which really brought the SWP and SP together was the prospect of advancing their ownseparate projects amongst the mass of discontented workers. They wanted to take advantage of the social discontent and found it convenient to picture local groupings such as the Tipperary Workers and Unemployed Action Group (WUAG) as the reformist wing of the ULA. But the WUAG has now resigned from the ULA, along with its TD, Seamus Healy, and a number of councillors. Reasons given were comrade Daly’s cooperation with Mick Wallace and the narrow factional activity of the SWP. Its press statement argued that “the SWP has prioritised recruitment to the SWP over building the ULA ... Our efforts to persuade our allies to desist from this approach have been unsuccessful.” The press release goes on to say that is “regrettable that our allies have refused to prioritise the building of the ULA at a time when working people are being subjected to unprecedented attacks and the betrayal of workers’ interests by the Labour Party is being ever more clearly exposed.”1 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#1)
By February of this year, the SWP seemed to have already decided that it was all over for the ULA. In an internal bulletin SWP members were told that a critique explaining the collapse of the ULA would soon be produced and little effort should henceforth be made to sustain its existence. The PBPA was relaunched on October 5, in a bid to “recapture the early dynamism that the United Left Alliance displayed”. One hundred people at the national relaunch were addressed by Richard Boyd-Barrett, who has recently stopped describing himself as a ULA TD. We are told that, while the PBPA is still part of the ULA, it “offers a very different model of how to organise in the present situation”. Rather than “start with the purity of its programme”, it “urges activists to focus on campaigning that can draw in new forces to the left”.2 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#2)
The implication that the ULA has a ‘pure’ or dogmatic approach to programme is staggering. The SWP and the SP themselves made sure that it was a case of exactly the opposite. It is an indication of the depth of the SWP’s own opportunism that it cannot even be saddled with the most minimal of reformist demands.

Democracy

A lot has been lost along the way. The launch meetings of the ULA in January 2010 attracted new forces, eager for the opportunity to build a political alternative. The subsequent election of five TDs stimulated confidence among layers of the workers - and the hope of a strong working class party. But that proved illusory. Both founding groups concurred that there could not be revolutionary unity in Ireland today - they could not countenance the prospect of being in the same party as their fellow socialists. They could conditionally come together around a minimalist, social democratic programme, but revolutionary ideas had no practical application for leftwing unity. Those who insisted otherwise were dismissed as sectarian crazies.
From the outset there was little or no democracy, despite rhetoric from the top table at those launch meetings. SWP leader Kieran Allen pledged in 2010 that the ULA would be a vibrant, membership-led organisation - we would have no more of the old bureaucratic diktats. In fact the opposite turned out to be true. In Cork the SP and SWP rallied to prevent the setting up of an email discussion list for members. They argued that it would be dominated by leftists, who would engage in endless criticism and polemic. The working class needed only simple solutions which could be provided by occasional leaflets on fighting back against the cuts. Arguments at meetings and email debates would put them off.
Of course, the reverse happened. New members who had initially supported the SP against the left found that the leadership also denied them a voice. Frustration at the lack of openness and the cynical ‘on-off’ attitude to the ULA caused them to leave in droves. Today branch organisation in Cork is largely defunct.
The ULA conference in April was a frustrating, stage-managed affair. Debate was allowed, but there were no motions or voting. The membership had no actual role in deciding the direction of the organisation or holding either the leadership or its TDs to account. Policy groups set up as a concession to the membership showed little sign of functioning subsequently. The conference promised for this November has been postponed until January at the earliest - rumours are that it will never happen.
There had been rumblings for some time about splits at the heart of the organisation. The Phoenix magazine reported “warfare” and “fratricide” on the steering committee.3 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#3) Things reached crisis point this September when one particular savage row spilled into in the pages of the bourgeois press. It was the first that many ULA members had heard of the dispute. The SP went to the media to air its grievances over the problems it was having with Clare Daly.

Resignation

On September 1 the national press led with the news that Clare Daly TD had quit the SP “following a row over her political connection with independent TD Mick Wallace”.4 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#4) Although Daly declared that her resignation was due to the low priority being given to the ULA by her own party, the SP insisted that the problem was her connection with Wallace, who had allegedly evaded payment of €1.4million in VAT. The SP said it had insisted that she break her political connection with Wallace and she had refused and resigned. This had led to the “complete breakdown in the political and working relations between her and the Socialist Party nationally, in the Dáil, and between her and the branches of the Socialist Party in the Dublin North constituency”. Worse, her political orientation had moved significantly to the right and she had gravitated towards non-socialist “independent members of the Technical Group in the Dáil”.5 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#5)
Daly responded that such allegations were absurd and that the only reason she had not called for Wallace’s resignation was because the Socialist Party itself had not done so. It is true that her fellow SP/ULA TD, Joe Higgins, had earlier refused to call for Wallace to resign, despite calls from Seamus Healy and Richard Boyd-Barrett for him to do so. Daly said she personally was entitled to half of the Dáil allowance paid to the SP, now that she was an ex-member. Higgins refused to pay her any money and said “he would be asking the department of finance to only pay the party the amount of allowance it is entitled to and to return the difference to the exchequer”.6 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#6) He chose to give it back to the state rather than to a fellow leftwing TD. Bitterness indeed.
SP members on the Cedar Lounge email forum insisted that things had been bad for some time, with Daly refusing to accept their organisation’s discipline. One contributor argued that her “resignation brought an end to a very difficult period where the NC of the Socialist Party bent over backwards to try and facilitate Clare Daly in dealing with the political difficulties she created for herself, the SP (and the ULA ... in the wider context). Her resignation brought these difficulties to an end and the SP has moved on.”7 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#7) An SP statement of September 3 insisted that she be vetted before being allowed to stay on as a ULA TD: “Issues or questions over Clare Daly’s status in the ULA can quite easily be resolved if Clare breaks her political alliance and connection with Mick Wallace TD, and the Socialist Party sincerely hopes that that is what she does. Asking Clare to do this isn’t unreasonable: it’s a political necessity.”8 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#8) The determination to push her out of the ULA is undeniable, even though the SP responds with mock horror at accusations of a witch-hunt.
The most hypocritical aspect of the Socialist Party stance is its defence of the use of the mainstream press to air its differences. One supporter on the Cedar Lounge debate demanded to know: “How exactly do you suggest that the Socialist Party communicates its views to ULA members in a way which won’t immediately end up in the public domain? Through some sort of psychic link?”9 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#9) Such sarcasm belies the depth of the problem. The concept of openness though our own press is alien to the SP. This is an organisation which believes in keeping all debate internal until the time comes for a split - at which time venom and acrimony is divulged to the lackeys of the bourgeois media; to an Irish press notorious for its virulent anti-socialism and attacks on the left.
The idea that the working class, never mind just ULA members, has a right to be kept informed of and be involved in such important political debates does not occur to the SP. The working class should be kept ignorant of all differences - lest it becomes confused. And this even goes for the membership, as was demonstrated by the opposition to the creation of a simple email discussion list. The only thing the membership should know is what picket line or protest meeting to go to.
As things stand, Clare Daly continues to deny any wrong-doing in respect of Mick Wallace. She and Joan Collins, rumoured to be about to split from the PBPA, are believed to be working together. Neither has published any programmatic or theoretical differences and, beyond accusing the SP of not prioritising the ULA, Daly has said little of consequence in public.

Where next?

Unaligned members of the ULA have been in discussions over the future of the project. A meeting will take place on Saturday October 27, which Clare Daly has been invited to address. Elections will also take place at the meeting to agree new representatives on the steering committee. However, with the ULA disintegrating around us, non-aligned members need to thoroughly debate out the political issues, rather than clutch at straws. Resuscitation of the project through the efforts of a couple of dozen individuals is not a serious option. The ULA was important because it brought a significant section of the left together, because it offered the possibility of a party. It is the question of party which must be debated and developed.
The most important lesson we need to learn is the fundamental necessity of democracy. Without openness, transparency and the free exchange of ideas, any socialist project is doomed. You would have hoped that the left had learned the lesson of the Soviet experience, but unfortunately it has not. I have not seen any recognition of this fundamental question in either of the election statements submitted by Alan Gibson and Eddie Conlon, who are both standing as reps to the steering committee. Indeed comrade Conlon proposes that the steering committee continue “decision-making by consensus”, because “one vote at this stage would lead to permanent competitive mobilisation by the founding organisations against each other.”10 (http://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/935/ula-ireland-sectarian-self-annihilation#10) It seems to have escaped Eddie’s attention that this is precisely what has happened anyway under the undemocratic system he proposes to continue. Bureaucratic methods do not stymie dictators: they assist them. As one email contributor remarked, “decision consensus = veto”.
And, while comrade Gibson quite rightly argues for a revolutionary programme, he too misses the point. He makes no argument for democracy, working class or otherwise. The larger questions of how we transform society are inextricably linked to our methods for doing so. Contrary to what he argues, we should not be out to “salvage” the ULA - we need to transcend it. As a first step we need our own press (printed and electronic) and an open online discussion list.
[email protected]

Notes

1. www.politics.ie/forum/united-left-alliance/197403-wuag-healy-withdraw-ula.html (http://www.politics.ie/forum/united-left-alliance/197403-wuag-healy-withdraw-ula.html).
2. www.swp.ie/content/people-profit-conference-important-step-forward (http://www.swp.ie/content/people-profit-conference-important-step-forward).
3. The Phoenix February 10 2012.
4. www.rte.ie/news/2012/0901/clare-daly-socialist-party.html (http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0901/clare-daly-socialist-party.html).
5. www.independent.ie/national-news/td-clare-daly-lashes-out-at-party-criticism-on-resignation-3216989.html (http://www.independent.ie/national-news/td-clare-daly-lashes-out-at-party-criticism-on-resignation-3216989.html).
6. www.rte.ie/news/2012/0902/row-over-daly-resignation-continues.html (http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0902/row-over-daly-resignation-continues.html).
7. http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/socialist-party-statement-on-clare-dalys-involvement-in-the-ula-monday-september-3rd.
8. www.socialistparty.net/component/content/article/3-newsflash/1034-statement-from-the-socialist-party-on-clare-dalys-involvement-in-the-ula (http://www.socialistparty.net/component/content/article/3-newsflash/1034-statement-from-the-socialist-party-on-clare-dalys-involvement-in-the-ula).
9. http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com/2012/09/03/socialist-party-statement-on-clare-dalys-involvement-in-the-ula-monday-september-3rd.
10. http://revolutionaryprogramme.wordpress.com/2012/10/23/eddie-conlans-election-statement-for-non-aligned-rep.

http://cpgb.org.uk/

l'Enfermé
25th October 2012, 18:16
Anne McShane has a long history of involvement in the workers movement, both in Britain and Ireland. She stood in a number of elections in Britain, for the CPGB and the Socialist Alliance.
She was also closely involved in solidarity work with the miner’s struggles of the 1990s and the various women's strike movements such as the Timex dispute in Dundee in 1995. She played a leading role in building the Socialist Alliance and has always been very passionate about the need to build revolutionary unity.
Today Anne lives in Cork, Ireland. She writes regularly for the Weekly Worker on political developments in Ireland and the response of the left. She has also lectured at Communist University.
A member of the United Left Alliance and an activist in the Anti-Household Tax and other anti-government campaigns, she continues to struggle for a united revolutionary party in Ireland. She was a founding member of Hands off the People of Iran campaign in Ireland in 2007.
Anne has always been a dedicated advocate of women's rights and has written and campaigned on abortion rights both in Britain and Ireland. She works as a lawyer and has recently commenced a PhD on the women's section of the CPSU (Zhenotdel) at Glasgow University.


More Weekly Worker articles by Anne McShane: http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/authors/anne-mcshane

Jolly Red Giant
26th October 2012, 19:07
Anne McShane has a long history of involvement in the workers movement, both in Britain and Ireland. She stood in a number of elections in Britain, for the CPGB and the Socialist Alliance.
She was also closely involved in solidarity work with the miner’s struggles of the 1990s and the various women's strike movements such as the Timex dispute in Dundee in 1995. She played a leading role in building the Socialist Alliance and has always been very passionate about the need to build revolutionary unity.
Today Anne lives in Cork, Ireland. She writes regularly for the Weekly Worker on political developments in Ireland and the response of the left. She has also lectured at Communist University.
A member of the United Left Alliance and an activist in the Anti-Household Tax and other anti-government campaigns, she continues to struggle for a united revolutionary party in Ireland. She was a founding member of Hands off the People of Iran campaign in Ireland in 2007.
Anne has always been a dedicated advocate of women's rights and has written and campaigned on abortion rights both in Britain and Ireland. She works as a lawyer and has recently commenced a PhD on the women's section of the CPSU (Zhenotdel) at Glasgow University.


More Weekly Worker articles by Anne McShane: http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/authors/anne-mcshane

The Weekly Worker is the left's version of the News of the World. It a sensationalist clap-trap of gossip and innuendo.

This article follows such a pattern - it is written by a rampant sectarian and contains clear factual errors. Furhtermore it contains all kinds of innudeno against the two main components which is also incorrect.

Its not worth the paper its written on.

Tim Cornelis
26th October 2012, 19:23
Why do parties even bother? A revolutionary organisation has no place in parliament. 10,000 people participating in extra-parliamentary anti-capitalist activities is more favourable than 1,000,000 people voting for parliamentary anti-capitalist parties.

Jolly Red Giant
26th October 2012, 21:02
Why do parties even bother? A revolutionary organisation has no place in parliament. 10,000 people participating in extra-parliamentary anti-capitalist activities is more favourable than 1,000,000 people voting for parliamentary anti-capitalist parties.
Parliament provides a platform to propagandise, agitate and organise - nothing mroe and nothing less.

l'Enfermé
27th October 2012, 12:48
Why do parties even bother? A revolutionary organisation has no place in parliament. 10,000 people participating in extra-parliamentary anti-capitalist activities is more favourable than 1,000,000 people voting for parliamentary anti-capitalist parties.
Because class struggle is political. To abandon political struggle is to abandon the class struggle. Though again, anarchists abandoned political struggle in the 19th century so I doubt you will care.

Flying Purple People Eater
27th October 2012, 13:40
This article follows such a pattern - it is written by a rampant sectarian and contains clear factual errors. Furhtermore it contains all kinds of innudeno against the two main components which is also incorrect.


Oh? And which would these be, exactly?


The Weekly Worker is the left's version of the News of the World. It a sensationalist clap-trap of gossip and innuendo.

Being critical of organisations and their flaws is not the same, nor even remotely comparable, with 'sensationalist clap-trap of gossip'. To claim otherwise is to do nothing more than show your political opinion makes you so stubborn as to wave off anything brought up in opposition as nonsense - quite ironic considering how you were just attacking the mag for being 'sensationalist' (how can you even call them sensationalist!? McCarthyesque scare-label shit is up in this crib!).

Let me guess: you're one of them dogmatists who praises organisations like the SWP without further ado, and dismisses any rational dissent in party lines because of 'slander and sectarianism' - much like what is presented in the article here.

No wonder you hold so much sympathy for them.

Q
27th October 2012, 18:34
Let me guess: you're one of them dogmatists who praises organisations like the SWP without further ado, and dismisses any rational dissent in party lines because of 'slander and sectarianism' - much like what is presented in the article here.

Almost spot on. JRG is a long time member of the Irish SP. You can see why he would react in such a partisan way.

Crux
27th October 2012, 18:51
Oh? And which would these be, exactly?



Being critical of organisations and their flaws is not the same, nor even remotely comparable, with 'sensationalist clap-trap of gossip'. To claim otherwise is to do nothing more than show your political opinion makes you so stubborn as to wave off anything brought up in opposition as nonsense - quite ironic considering how you were just attacking the mag for being 'sensationalist' (how can you even call them sensationalist!? McCarthyesque scare-label shit is up in this crib!).

Let me guess: you're one of them dogmatists who praises organisations like the SWP without further ado, and dismisses any rational dissent in party lines because of 'slander and sectarianism' - much like what is presented in the article here.

No wonder you hold so much sympathy for them.
:laugh: No see, the way I see WW/CPGB(PCC) is basically like a friendlier less hysterical version of the sparts and their ilk. Many claims in the article, especially in relation to Clare Daly have already been answered. But I suppose it's better to leave this to JRG.

Q: You're in the Dutch Weekly Worker's readers group these days?

Jolly Red Giant
27th October 2012, 19:49
I hadn't planned doing this but - what the f*ck the work I have to do can wait- and I will preface by saying these comments are mine written in a personal capacity and not intended as stating the position of the Socialist Party on this article - the SP wouldn't waste its time responding.


Oh? And which would these be, exactly?


Here goes


The aim of the organisation from the outset was precisely to accommodate itself to the right.Sectarian innuendo


It has only been this year that the ULA has taken a stand, when to her credit Clare Daly and fellow ULA TD Joan Collins presented a bill to legalise limited abortion rights. Ironically the other main signatory of the bill was Mick Wallace, maverick independent TD and former property developer, who has been the apparent cause of Daly’s controversial exit from the SP.Wallace is no more a maverick than donald duck - he's a tax-dodging property developer who owes €40million to the banks and €2.1million in unpaid VAT which he collected from working class people buying his apartments. Furthermore, he was fined by the courts for taking pensions payments from workers and sticking the money in the companies accounts.

The ULA Steering Committee had agreed that any parliamentary private members bills submitted would only carry the names of the ULA deputies - Clare Daly consistently broke this agreement, as in the case of the abortion bill, by getting right-wing deputies to sign the bill.

And there was nothing 'apparent' about Clare Daly's resignation - and it wasn't controversial - it was inevitable given her political support for Wallace when his tax dodging exploits were exposed.


Another problem from the outset was the determination of both main founding organisations, the SWP and SP, to restrict democracy.Factually incorrect - the SP consistently put forward proposals to enhance democracy - the SP opposed given sectarians like McShane free reign to run riot around the ULA on a sectarian whinge-binge.


Both were deeply hostile to the prospect of organisational fusion, with the SP being the most reluctant. Another sectarian swipe - The ULA was not and was never intended as a vehicle for organisational fusion.


after a tug of war between the two groups. Factually incorrect - there were four groups represented on the national steering committee


It is only since April 2012 - when a group of non-aligned members was formed with the right of representation on the committee - that minutes have been circulated.Factually incorrect - and it was the SP that ensured non-aligned representation on the steering committee - of course the non-aligned aren't really non-aligned - they are sectarians like McShane and our resident spartoid.


Behind the rhetoric of unity, the only thing which really brought the SWP and SP together was the prospect of advancing their ownseparate projects amongst the mass of discontented workers.Factually incorrect - the SP was and is 100% committed to the building of the ULA - however, the SP has consistently pointed out that the ULA will not be built by bringing together the existing left groups and individuals - and that is all that has been attracted to it so far.


But the WUAG has now resigned from the ULA, along with its TD, Seamus Healy, and a number of councillors. Reasons given were comrade Daly’s cooperation with Mick Wallace and the narrow factional activity of the SWP. Its press statement argued that “the SWP has prioritised recruitment to the SWP over building the ULA ... Our efforts to persuade our allies to desist from this approach have been unsuccessful.” The press release goes on to say that is “regrettable that our allies have refused to prioritise the building of the ULA at a time when working people are being subjected to unprecedented attacks and the betrayal of workers’ interests by the Labour Party is being ever more clearly exposed.”It is amazing how groups and individuals make strident comments about 'building the ULA' when its in their interest to make such propaganda noises. Out of the 80 or so members of Healy's WUAG group - only a half a dozen ever took out membership of the ULA - so much for prioritising it.


The implication that the ULA has a ‘pure’ or dogmatic approach to programme is staggering. The SWP and the SP themselves made sure that it was a case of exactly the opposite. Sectarian clap-trap - only in the inner sanctum of the sectarian would the programme of a broad left alliance be anything other than a compromise of some sort.


The launch meetings of the ULA in January 2010 attracted new forces, eager for the opportunity to build a political alternative. The subsequent election of five TDs stimulated confidence among layers of the workers - and the hope of a strong working class party. But that proved illusory. The problem was that though numbers turned up at the meetings - practically no one joined except for the current left elements. Furthermore to suggest that people didn't join because the programme was not 'revolutionary' enough actually beggers belief and such delusions again only exist in the inner sanctum of the sectarian.


In Cork the SP and SWP rallied to prevent the setting up of an email discussion list for members. They argued that it would be dominated by leftists, who would engage in endless criticism and polemicActually what the SP argued was that it would be dominated by McShane and the local spartoid to engage in an endless round of nonsense like this article.

Now I am not going to go through the stuff about Clare Daly's resignation - its on another thread - but this -

Daly said she personally was entitled to half of the Dáil allowance paid to the SP, now that she was an ex-member. Higgins refused to pay her any money and said “he would be asking the department of finance to only pay the party the amount of allowance it is entitled to and to return the difference to the exchequer”. He chose to give it back to the state rather than to a fellow leftwing TD. Bitterness indeed.Factually incorrect and rampant sectarianism tossed in for good measure - to start with Joe Higgins is a representative of the Socialist Party and operates under the direction of the Socialist Party - he doesn't make political decisions without referring to the national committee of the SP. Second point - the Socialist Party legally could not give any money to Clare Daly - it is against the rules of parliament to do so. The Socialist Party was entitled to claim this money itself but decided against it because rampant sectarians like McShane (and the bourgeois media) would never have shut up about it.


SP members on the Cedar Lounge email forum insisted that things had been bad for some time, with Daly refusing to accept their organisation’s discipline. One contributor argued that her “resignation brought an end to a very difficult period where the NC of the Socialist Party bent over backwards to try and facilitate Clare Daly in dealing with the political difficulties she created for herself, the SP (and the ULA ... in the wider context). Her resignation brought these difficulties to an end and the SP has moved on.”That was me - and it is a statement of fact


An SP statement of September 3 insisted that she be vetted before being allowed to stay on as a ULA TD: “Issues or questions over Clare Daly’s status in the ULA can quite easily be resolved if Clare breaks her political alliance and connection with Mick Wallace TD, and the Socialist Party sincerely hopes that that is what she does. Asking Clare to do this isn’t unreasonable: it’s a political necessity.”
The vetting is McShane's invention - the SP has consistently stated that Clare Daly's continued support for Wallace would cause continuing difficulties for the ULA - and it has - it led directly to the resignation of Healy and his group from the ULA.


The determination to push her out of the ULA is undeniable, even though the SP responds with mock horror at accusations of a witch-hunt.The Socialist Party wants Clare Daly to remain in the ULA - the problem is that pressures over Daly's support for Wallace on the ULA could cause it to implode - and potentially that process is actually happening. there is hardly a day that goes by where there is not a photo of Clare Daly and Mick Wallace together - one of the worst recent ones occurred when Wallace rejoined the Dail Technical Group and as Joe Higgins was engaged in questioning the Prime Minister over the impact of austerity, Daly and Wallace were sitting in Parliament together laughing - that evening the hacks had a field day with a video of the two laughing and a comment 'Daly and her friend laugh at Joe Higgins'.


The most hypocritical aspect of the Socialist Party stance is its defence of the use of the mainstream press to air its differences. One supporter on the Cedar Lounge debate demanded to know: “How exactly do you suggest that the Socialist Party communicates its views to ULA members in a way which won’t immediately end up in the public domain? Through some sort of psychic link?” Such sarcasm belies the depth of the problem. Sectarian innuendo - McShane isn't shy about running to anyone who will listen about the bags the SP and SWP are making of the ULA.


The concept of openness though our own press is alien to the SP. This is an organisation which believes in keeping all debate internal until the time comes for a split - at which time venom and acrimony is divulged to the lackeys of the bourgeois media; to an Irish press notorious for its virulent anti-socialism and attacks on the left.Factually incorrect - and more sectarianism - three members of the Socialist Party resigned - all, according to themselves for different reasons - there was no split. These resignations are unfortunate - but this does happen. Furthermore - there was and is no venom directed against Clare Daly. The Socialist Party has repeatedly expressed its appreciation for the 25 years of outstanding work of Clare Daly as a member of the SP and hopes that she will realise the political damage her associating with Wallace is doing to the left in ireland.


The idea that the working class, never mind just ULA members, has a right to be kept informed of and be involved in such important political debates does not occur to the SP.The Socialist Party is organised on the basis of democratic centralism - it operates on the basis of internal debate and untiy in action. The Socialist Party makes absolutely no apology to anyone, and most especially a sectarian like Anne McShane, for operating on this basis. All McShane wants is to pick over the bones of the SP if she ever got her wish and saw its demise.


I have not seen any recognition of this fundamental question in either of the election statements submitted by Alan Gibson and Eddie Conlon, who are both standing as reps to the steering committee. Of course McShane forgets to inform her readership that Gibson is a member of a spartoid group and Conlon resigned from People before Profit a couple of weeks ago because PBP wouldn't make him their rep on the steering committee - hardly going to instill confidence in the 'non-aligned' members of the ULA.



The ULA was and is intended as a vehicle that could lead to the formation of a new party of the left in Ireland. This was only ever going to be a prospect on the backs of large numbers of new activists joining and swamping the existing left groups (including the Socialist Party) and thereby rendering sectarian political conflict among existing groups and individuals (including the likes of McShane and Gibson) redundant and an irrelevence. That did not happen. The working class in ireland has not yet moved into struggle and stuggle has not manifest itself in people looking to the ULA as a poltical alternative. What has happened is that wider community campaigns have garnered widespread support (like the campaign against household charges) but this has yet to develop in a political character. The Socialist Party is attempting to change this and is arguing for the CAHWT to become a wider anti-austerity campaign.

P.S. - the WW is the tabloid gossip rag of the far left - everyone is well aware of that - and it actually enjoys its role. I read it - but then again I occasionally watch Fox news when I am in need of a good laugh.

Sinister Cultural Marxist
28th October 2012, 04:12
What exactly is the status of Clare Daly's relationship with this Wallace fellow? It is hard to believe that a person would willingly sacrifice political principles and alignments seemingly arbitrarily on behalf a buddy who happens to be corrupt. On one hand, I don't want to assume that a more intimate kind of relationship like a sexual one is the motivating factor, or a more corrupting one like a mutually beneficial financial relationship, but it seems very strange that a socialist would quit a leftist movement in defense of some corrupt millionaire unless they had a particularly strong attachment to said millionaire. Money, sex and power could drive someone is such a direction perhaps but it is unusual to see people throwing away their convictions so easily for other motives. Perhaps it is just tabloid speculation, but the situation is fishy. Standing up for bourgeois, corrupt real estate developers seems to be quite far removed from any "socialist" agenda, so what would motivate such a move away from leftism?

Jolly Red Giant
28th October 2012, 13:48
What exactly is the status of Clare Daly's relationship with this Wallace fellow? It is hard to believe that a person would willingly sacrifice political principles and alignments seemingly arbitrarily on behalf a buddy who happens to be corrupt. On one hand, I don't want to assume that a more intimate kind of relationship like a sexual one is the motivating factor, or a more corrupting one like a mutually beneficial financial relationship, but it seems very strange that a socialist would quit a leftist movement in defense of some corrupt millionaire unless they had a particularly strong attachment to said millionaire. Money, sex and power could drive someone is such a direction perhaps but it is unusual to see people throwing away their convictions so easily for other motives. Perhaps it is just tabloid speculation, but the situation is fishy. Standing up for bourgeois, corrupt real estate developers seems to be quite far removed from any "socialist" agenda, so what would motivate such a move away from leftism?
There has been a lot of speculation as to what kind of a relationship Clare Daly has with Mick Wallace - none of the speculation has come from members of the Socialist Party. In fact the Socialist Party has specifically stated that it never had any issue with any personal friendship/relationship Clare Daly had/has with Wallace - the only issue was continued political support that Clare Daly gave/is giving to Wallace.

Wallace went into hiding for a couple of months but since he has stuck his head above the parapet a few weeks ago the only party he has attacked is the Socialist Party. He was given a full hour of airtime on national radio one Saturday morning two weeks ago to do his poor-mouth act that the banks were out to get him and it wasn't his fault, and he kept the VAT so he wouldn't have to sack workers and he only gave himself and his sons a pay rise to €250,000 a year when his company was on the verge of bankruptcy in order to save it. What he did do on the programme was not only attack the Socialist Party but tell down-right lies about Joe Higgins in an attempt to politically damage Joe Higgins and the Socialist Party. Wallace claimed that he had told Joe Higgins about his exploits dodging tax months before his antics were exposed and Joe Higgins didn't have a problem with it. Joe Higgins was given all of two minutes on the programme to refute these scurrilous accusations and set the record straight.

Wallace is a chancer, a populist who likes making wine in his brother's vineyard in Italy (Wallace bought it and supposedly gave it to the brother in lieu of an unpaid debt), managing his own pet project, national soccer team Wexford Youths, and building his electoral support base in Wexford (ably abetted by Clare Daly). He is a very useful tool for the bourgeois establishment - someone who used to have a left tinge - someone who developed a relationship with a socialist public representative - and now someone who can be wheeled out to attack the left while Clare Daly continues to give him political cover.

There are more skeletons in the cupboard to come out yet. The SP knows this, Clare Daly knows this and Wallace knows this - the problem is Clare Daly seems oblivios to the consequences. It is all very messy and very annoying - particularly in the light of the tasks that face the left in Ireland at the moment (personally if I got within ten feet of Clare Daly, and I have considered her a friend for nearly 25 years, I would give her an unmerciful boot in the rear end and tell her to cop herself on - however, at this stage I don't think it would have any effect).

Tim Cornelis
28th October 2012, 14:15
Because class struggle is political. To abandon political struggle is to abandon the class struggle. Though again, anarchists abandoned political struggle in the 19th century so I doubt you will care.

Are you joking? Participation in electoral politics (bourgeois electoral politics mind you, from a Marxist perspective) equals "political struggle"? I'm sorry, but that makes absolutely no sense at all.
I can't even articulate how ridiculous this is. Essentially, what you just said is that without participation in parliament there is no class struggle. It's so obvious how ludicrous such a claim is, I can't even begin to explain how wrong it is!
You are right that anarchists have abandoned political struggle, since you equate political struggle with parliamentarianism. Though anarchistic parties were still present in parliament in the 20th century, such as the Socialist Party in the Netherlands.


Parliament provides a platform to propagandise, agitate and organise - nothing mroe and nothing less.

I can understand propagandise and agitate, but you can't organise from parliament. In any case, the historical trajectory of parties participating in politics has been that of compromising its revolutionary credentials. Far-left seek to attract more voters in non-revolutionary periods, thereby moving to the right. This has been the case for most any political party, from Latin America to Europe, I can think of.

This is not without reason. Any party participating on a revolutionary platform wont be able to vote on any measure. All measures voted on in parliament are reformist, at best. As such a revolutionary party would not vote on anything and becomes useless. Fewer and fewer people would vote for it since it doesn't do anything. In contrast, a far-left party that do use its parliamentary power to push for reformist measures opens the gates for, well, reformism. Which happened to any pre-WW2 social-democratic party, as well as communist parties in Italy, Spain, and France.

Q
28th October 2012, 14:23
Essentially, what you just said is that without participation in parliament there is no class struggle. It's so obvious how ludicrous such a claim is, I can't even begin to explain how wrong it is!
Nope, that is not what he said. Political struggle isn't equal to participation in parliament. Permanent opposition in parliament (note, anti-coalitionism) is merely one available tactic in the political struggle of our class and not even the most important one in my view.


Though anarchistic parties were still present in parliament in the 20th century, such as the Socialist Party in the Netherlands.
The SP was never an anarchist formation. They started out in 1965 as a Maoist split from the CPN, only taking current shape in 1972.

Crux
28th October 2012, 14:38
I hadn't planned doing this but - what the f*ck the work I have to do can wait- and I will preface by saying these comments are mine written in a personal capacity and not intended as stating the position of the Socialist Party on this article - the SP wouldn't waste its time responding.



Here goes

Sectarian innuendo

Wallace is no more a maverick than donald duck - he's a tax-dodging property developer who owes €40million to the banks and €2.1million in unpaid VAT which he collected from working class people buying his apartments. Furthermore, he was fined by the courts for taking pensions payments from workers and sticking the money in the companies accounts.

The ULA Steering Committee had agreed that any parliamentary private members bills submitted would only carry the names of the ULA deputies - Clare Daly consistently broke this agreement, as in the case of the abortion bill, by getting right-wing deputies to sign the bill.

And there was nothing 'apparent' about Clare Daly's resignation - and it wasn't controversial - it was inevitable given her political support for Wallace when his tax dodging exploits were exposed.

Factually incorrect - the SP consistently put forward proposals to enhance democracy - the SP opposed given sectarians like McShane free reign to run riot around the ULA on a sectarian whinge-binge.

Another sectarian swipe - The ULA was not and was never intended as a vehicle for organisational fusion.

Factually incorrect - there were four groups represented on the national steering committee

Factually incorrect - and it was the SP that ensured non-aligned representation on the steering committee - of course the non-aligned aren't really non-aligned - they are sectarians like McShane and our resident spartoid.

Factually incorrect - the SP was and is 100% committed to the building of the ULA - however, the SP has consistently pointed out that the ULA will not be built by bringing together the existing left groups and individuals - and that is all that has been attracted to it so far.

It is amazing how groups and individuals make strident comments about 'building the ULA' when its in their interest to make such propaganda noises. Out of the 80 or so members of Healy's WUAG group - only a half a dozen ever took out membership of the ULA - so much for prioritising it.

Sectarian clap-trap - only in the inner sanctum of the sectarian would the programme of a broad left alliance be anything other than a compromise of some sort.

The problem was that though numbers turned up at the meetings - practically no one joined except for the current left elements. Furthermore to suggest that people didn't join because the programme was not 'revolutionary' enough actually beggers belief and such delusions again only exist in the inner sanctum of the sectarian.

Actually what the SP argued was that it would be dominated by McShane and the local spartoid to engage in an endless round of nonsense like this article.

Now I am not going to go through the stuff about Clare Daly's resignation - its on another thread - but this -
Factually incorrect and rampant sectarianism tossed in for good measure - to start with Joe Higgins is a representative of the Socialist Party and operates under the direction of the Socialist Party - he doesn't make political decisions without referring to the national committee of the SP. Second point - the Socialist Party legally could not give any money to Clare Daly - it is against the rules of parliament to do so. The Socialist Party was entitled to claim this money itself but decided against it because rampant sectarians like McShane (and the bourgeois media) would never have shut up about it.

That was me - and it is a statement of fact

The vetting is McShane's invention - the SP has consistently stated that Clare Daly's continued support for Wallace would cause continuing difficulties for the ULA - and it has - it led directly to the resignation of Healy and his group from the ULA.

The Socialist Party wants Clare Daly to remain in the ULA - the problem is that pressures over Daly's support for Wallace on the ULA could cause it to implode - and potentially that process is actually happening. there is hardly a day that goes by where there is not a photo of Clare Daly and Mick Wallace together - one of the worst recent ones occurred when Wallace rejoined the Dail Technical Group and as Joe Higgins was engaged in questioning the Prime Minister over the impact of austerity, Daly and Wallace were sitting in Parliament together laughing - that evening the hacks had a field day with a video of the two laughing and a comment 'Daly and her friend laugh at Joe Higgins'.

Sectarian innuendo - McShane isn't shy about running to anyone who will listen about the bags the SP and SWP are making of the ULA.

Factually incorrect - and more sectarianism - three members of the Socialist Party resigned - all, according to themselves for different reasons - there was no split. These resignations are unfortunate - but this does happen. Furthermore - there was and is no venom directed against Clare Daly. The Socialist Party has repeatedly expressed its appreciation for the 25 years of outstanding work of Clare Daly as a member of the SP and hopes that she will realise the political damage her associating with Wallace is doing to the left in ireland.

The Socialist Party is organised on the basis of democratic centralism - it operates on the basis of internal debate and untiy in action. The Socialist Party makes absolutely no apology to anyone, and most especially a sectarian like Anne McShane, for operating on this basis. All McShane wants is to pick over the bones of the SP if she ever got her wish and saw its demise.

Of course McShane forgets to inform her readership that Gibson is a member of a spartoid group and Conlon resigned from People before Profit a couple of weeks ago because PBP wouldn't make him their rep on the steering committee - hardly going to instill confidence in the 'non-aligned' members of the ULA.



The ULA was and is intended as a vehicle that could lead to the formation of a new party of the left in Ireland. This was only ever going to be a prospect on the backs of large numbers of new activists joining and swamping the existing left groups (including the Socialist Party) and thereby rendering sectarian political conflict among existing groups and individuals (including the likes of McShane and Gibson) redundant and an irrelevence. That did not happen. The working class in ireland has not yet moved into struggle and stuggle has not manifest itself in people looking to the ULA as a poltical alternative. What has happened is that wider community campaigns have garnered widespread support (like the campaign against household charges) but this has yet to develop in a political character. The Socialist Party is attempting to change this and is arguing for the CAHWT to become a wider anti-austerity campaign.

P.S. - the WW is the tabloid gossip rag of the far left - everyone is well aware of that - and it actually enjoys its role. I read it - but then again I occasionally watch Fox news when I am in need of a good laugh.
So what you're saying is the Weekly Worker would print inaccuracies and sectarian slander? My, I am shocked.

Tim Cornelis
28th October 2012, 14:43
Nope, that is not what he said. Political struggle isn't equal to participation in parliament. Permanent opposition in parliament (note, anti-coalitionism) is merely one available tactic in the political struggle of our class and not even the most important one in my view.

Well actually he did say that. Just dissect what happened: I wondered why parties even bother participating in electoral politics (that is, I criticised electoral politics). I agree that electoral politics is one available tactic, but I wondered whether it is a useful one (which I answered negatively). l'Enfermé replied "Because class struggle is political. To abandon political struggle is to abandon the class struggle. Though again, anarchists abandoned political struggle in the 19th century so I doubt you will care."

So apparently not participating in parliament equals no political and thus no class struggle. This is what he implied. Me criticising electoral politics leads l'Énferme to conclude it is abandoning class struggle. Clea as can be.

Perhaps he meant differently. But if he meant what you said he just used linguistic gymnastics to make a half-arsed jab at anarchism. He circumvented the evident notion that criticising electoral politics does not mean opposition to political struggle in general, in order to direct that jab towards anarchism. Rather disingenuous.

As I said, criticising electoral politics does not mean opposition to political struggle, and it is by no means true that anarchists have abandoned political struggle. Even anarcho-syndicalists, whom emphasise economic over political struggle, still recognise the need for political struggle.

All in all, 3/10 for this half-arsed, disingenuous, and uninformed sectarian jab.


The SP was never an anarchist formation. They started out in 1965 as a Maoist split from the CPN, only taking current shape in 1972.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Party_(Netherlands,_interbellum)

Put the ')' behind the link when pasted.

Q
28th October 2012, 14:55
Well actually he did say that. Just dissect what happened: I wondered why parties even bother participating in electoral politics (that is, I criticised electoral politics). I agree that electoral politics is one available tactic, but I wondered whether it is a useful one (which I answered negatively). l'Enfermé replied "Because class struggle is political. To abandon political struggle is to abandon the class struggle. Though again, anarchists abandoned political struggle in the 19th century so I doubt you will care."
Yeah, I can see where the confusion came from. l'Enfermé has to answer for himself, but I don't think he put an "=" sign there.That would be stupid.


Perhaps he meant differently. But if he meant what you said he just used linguistic gymnastics to make a half-arsed jab at anarchism. He circumvented the evident notion that criticising electoral politics does not mean opposition to political struggle in general, in order to direct that jab towards anarchism. Rather disingenuous.
That indeed he'll have to answer himself.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_Party_(Netherlands,_interbellum)

Put the ')' behind the link when pasted.
Ah, you had to be more specific then. Knowing the party of Harm Kolthek is quite nerdy as it is quite obscure :p

l'Enfermé
28th October 2012, 21:28
Q's interpretation of my meaning is the closest to the truth.

My point, to be short and to avoid derailing this thread, was this: Marxists since Marx and Engels have maintained that (genuine) class struggle is political struggle. In bourgeois parliamentary systems, parliaments, for workers, are the most obvious and logical arenas for political struggle.

Anyway, I said what I said because Anarchists and Semi-Anarchists reject participation in parliament because they reject political struggle(which they of course justify with Bakunin's "the economic is political!" idiocy, or a variation of it) since the 19th century. The two are tied up when talking to Anarchists.