Davy Carlin on the ARN and SWP in Belfast

by Scáth Shéamais Tue Nov 16, 2004 22:10

Am I the only one who gets the feeling that "Davy Carlin - Independent Socialist" is planning to run for councillor, or something along those lines?

by Anon Wed Nov 17, 2004 13:58

Part 1 is located here
http://lark.phoblacht.net/dc03114g.html

by swp Wed Nov 17, 2004 22:17

swp unchanging, hasn't he noticed the movement of the party on No. 1, elections, from not taking part in elections
to make good efforts, On coalitions, from calling our old enemy the SP "reformists" to practically begging them to make an election pact. In the north, prodestants aren't impearialist lackeys any more thank god (prod or taig god),. I'd say the swp have changed alot in the last few years. In the unions, no more smashing, but going for elected positions. Some good changes some i am not so sure of, but you can't say the party is unbending.

by 'HE' Thu Nov 18, 2004 14:37

Unchanging and unbending in the rigid format of DC at this time {which is where the nub of HIS problem lays - as stated in the article} and all that has flowed from that, more especially the practical examples HE gives on issues, including tactical decisions based on unchanging and unbending historical all embracing rhetoric {at times}.

by You what? Thu Nov 18, 2004 17:01

Lets be honest about this.

He means he was ok with DC as long as he was in the majority as soon as he was in a minority he left, not only that he announced it in the bosses press!

by Infantile Disorder Watch Thu Nov 18, 2004 17:14

"...not only that he announced it in the bosses press"

Your having a laugh.
Which paper did RBB condemn direct action in. The Sindo perhaps.
Or which paper has Kieran Allen recently wrote for. Sunday Business Post perhaps.

by D Thu Nov 18, 2004 18:14

Sorry, but I have actually been in a minority on various occasions throughout the years, this on the Political Commitee, our National Committee, our Northern Commitee, our conferences, our district committee and my branch committee etc. Such is the nature of discussion and debate, but, as stated, I had always followed the line even on that that I had fundamentally opposed at times. This until I could no longer put myself in such a position given such events, this as well as the other points that I had raised.

I believe once again that it is a case of listening to more of the myths, but I must thank you for relating that particular circulating one, and bringing it to my attention, as it is the first I had of heard it.

by YW Thu Nov 18, 2004 19:05

Yes you did have disagreements in the past BUT they where on secondary issues and behind the scenes.

Now your disagreements are at a time when you are representing the SWP at the head of a movement and you decided that that was the moment to split.

One question. Why did you do it through the Irish News?

by Peter Thu Nov 18, 2004 19:18

Well done, Davy. Good to see somebody who is willing to stand by his principles.

by YW Thu Nov 18, 2004 19:32

A basic point of DC is to ensure that leadership figures dont use the party to get into high position and then run off on their own, making compromises to advance their own career and breaking the democratic mandate of the people who put them there in the first place.

Leadership figures like TDs, like council members, like ....................................

by D Thu Nov 18, 2004 20:43

Sorry my friend you are ill informed, my decision to leave was a long long time coming and many members where fully aware of both that and ongoing disagreements for many many months prior, this right up until I took that decision.


As for the Irish news, I sent out my decision 'after it' had been sent to our leadership, this I sent to my contacts and to those activists that I hold respect for. Some of them would indeed be regular contributors on this site.

So such information was in the public domain and if it is a story with the media that I had left the SWP, which they have picked up on, well that’s of little concern to me. I did though not only send my decision to activists whom I work with etc but also put it up on a number of sites. Why, well as I stated, firstly I did not want them to hear it third hand as we all know about those aul myths that at times can be circulated.

Secondly I wanted genuine activists to know the reason, while thirdly I wanted to make it very clear that my problem was not with individual comrades, or indeed much of their politics and that I would also want the friendships and working together to remain.

AS for,

''A basic point of DC is to ensure that leadership figures don’t use the party to get into high position and then run off on their own, making compromises to advance their own career and breaking the democratic mandate of the people who put them there in the first place''.

''Leadership figures like TDs, like council members, like ....................................

As I stated in my article when I joined the Belfast SWP there was only a hand full of activists fairly unknown. Three years later we still had a handful of members still fairly unknown. But we were out those years at times maybe four or five nights a week knocking on doors, putting up posters, organising events, rain, hall or shine. Dare say though that any of us was doing it for a career, it was through a belief, which still burns strong in my heart as I know it does in other Comrades hearts.

Secondly I am not and had not been for a long long time on any leadership bodies. Although I am seen as a leading member I believe this has been more to do with graft and support on the ground more than being in the leaderships.

Finally to break down another myth on your point, ''making compromises to advance their own career and breaking the democratic mandate of the people who put them there in the first place''.

''Leadership figures like TDs, like council members.

Firstly I hold none of these positions, and despite the, is he or isn't he, I will not be standing in the forthcoming elections {another myth broken}, and again many persons would be well informed as to my position in relation to this. So sorry mate not looking for a full time career in electoral politics.

I know it seems hard but it is really quite simple, I left for the reasons given, I still hold respect for SWP comrades and only yesterday was standing with them on a picket in Belfast, sharing both solidarity and a friendly yarn.

I am not doing what I do because I want a career out of it - I will not be standing in the elections - I sent my resignation out to the activist’s network - I am not a Nationialist a Liberal etc - I won't be joining another party - I left for the reasons given etc etc etc - and finally I am simply an Independent Socialist activist committed to seeking real change.

I understand that it may be hard for some to get their heads round this because there has been no splits - but fraternal parting, - no hidden factors - but simply a recorded parting - no career moves to other parties or to stand in elections, but simply to continue as an Independent Socialist.

Therefore as I have exhausted everything I can think of on my position, it only remains to be said that I look forward in a week or two to going to Marxism to have the opportunity to listen to such speakers, as Eamonn, Ryan, Gordon, Barbara, Goretti, Richard, Brid, Mark, Brian, Shay, Melisa, Peadar, Deirdre, Marnie, Kevin Colm, Joe, Willie, Connor, Rory, Jamie etc, from the SWP, as I have and will be doing in attending other such workshops, forums and meetings organised by other organisations and none, and hopefully to work fraternally with all activists that wish to effect real change.

I have now made my points extensively and have taken a few days out to reply to all the points raised that have been e-mailed to me or via phone contacts and on websites etc over the last few days. I have to now get back to other things and I hope that I have answered all points raised and so therefore, having taken a few days out to respond to everyone - If any one has any future points I refer you back to my article. All the Best SIgning off. D

by YW Fri Nov 19, 2004 10:48

You where put in the leadership of the ARN as a SWP activist when the SWP did not agree with you on every single issue you then left not only did you leave, you made it known to the press and said your issue with the SWP was DC therefore implying that there was something wrong with SWP democracy.

The real issue is that he left when he could not stand majority decisions.

by Peter Fri Nov 19, 2004 11:02

Confirming what we always knew and without any bit of shame.

"You where put in the leadership of the ARN as a SWP activist when the SWP did not agree with you on every single issue you."

So the SWP put people in positions. Great democracy that.

by Gluckstein Fri Nov 19, 2004 11:27

For a real understanding of what 'democracy' constitutes in the SWP, I recommend this article based on comments made by one of their leading members in Britain, John Molyneux: its absolutely damning: no leadership elections contested, no motions from branches, no right of reply by those who dissent. Thats no democratic centralism its plain ole dictatorship.

http://www.cpgb.org.uk/worker/553/swpdemocracy.htm

by Ronan Fri Nov 19, 2004 11:43

yeh, so you left the Peoples Front of Judea to join the judean Peoples Front. .who cares?

by Sorry Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:20

So Davey was lifted and [put] into the leadership of the ARN?

SWP democracy well are you serious do we have to supply the links to all the past x members and their reasons for leaving because of SWP democracy.

With YWs points and responses so far I think YW is really looking for a bit of SWP bashing. He could not actually be that naive to think SWP and democracy

by whistle blower Fri Nov 19, 2004 12:27

CPGB: Centrism, Vacillation and Capitulation
Ian Donovan

Author’s Note: The following article, replying to political attacks on the author in the Weekly Worker (14 October), was submitted to that journal but denied publication. Given that WW publishes all kinds of lengthy and often esoteric material when it judges such material useful to its publishers, readers can judge for themselves whether this material is, as the editor maintains, "unsuitable for publication", or whether this is a cynical break with WW’s proclaimed policy of openness and claim to be "champions of political debate".

.

read on here... http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages/Next/CPGB.html (link inserted by Indymedia editor, please don't cut and paste)