Socialist Worker

by Nats Wed Feb 23, 2005 17:18

I have to agree that while not being a fan of SWP the Irish paper of late is definately a more balanced read.

by Major Woody Wed Feb 23, 2005 17:27

If pride comes before a fall you often get a bit of humility afterwards.

But do you really need a party for "coming together to discuss tactics and strategies, ideas or idealogies etc." Not to mention that "acting as a fist" is not exactly where the SWP''s reputation has stood over the last few years except perhaps towards their own members.

by get real Wed Feb 23, 2005 17:35

Come on Davy, you were once a member of the SWP. In fact up until quite recently. Your praise of the swp paper is self praise and typical of the SWP where everyone pretends to be something they are not.

by D Wed Feb 23, 2005 18:08

Hi,Major Woody - no you do not need a party to come together to discuss tactics straagies etc. But the nature of a DC party - in theory - is for open and democratic debate - then for all move as one.

Get real my praise for the SWP paper is self praise?

I say it as I see it - the British SWP paper I believe has come on leap and bounds over the months.

That does not mean that I agree with every thing that is written or agree with everything the SWP do.

Similar the case with other publications from across the political left spectrum that I enjoy and find educational but may not agree with in their entirity. The paper I believe is begining to progress forward with and within the movement - you may think differently and that is your right to so.

I state my points solely in relation to the paper as persons who follow the site would know of my problems with the SWP which are well documented.

That though will not hold me back from giving credit where cedit is due as I have done on many occasions in relation to other parties - individuals etc that I have worked with within campaigns or engaged with. Again all well documented. .

by Cynic Wed Feb 23, 2005 18:14

Fair enough Davy, credit where its due as you say. Why not drop them a line and let them know but a fucking thread is a bit ott, don't you think?
After all this is Irish Indymedia.

by D Wed Feb 23, 2005 18:27

Hi Cynic I had thought Indymedia was an open site as so one could write what the please within its guidelines.

Therefore I chose to write this as I personally see it as an important development and also a welcome one.


Being an Internationalist myself I do not tend to Nationalise my ideas to the confines of an - Irish site -.

Forgive me if I am wrong but do I not read posts regularly on this site of points raised for debate and discussion on things happening around the world.?

If so then as an Internationalist I believe that is a good thing.

by Gobsmacked Wed Feb 23, 2005 18:28

"The point also Kieran makes of a revolutionary party having to be democratic - is of course fundemental more especially though in practice - as well as words. There are other points Kieran raises that I would again agree with but presently have limited time to write"

Are we talking about the same Kieran Allen. Davy do your really believe Kieran when he talks of democracy?

by ??? Wed Feb 23, 2005 18:36

Maybe you need to read a wee bit deeper into those lines?

by Dermot Lacey Wed Feb 23, 2005 18:53

This may surprise some people but I do want to take this opportunity to congratulate the SWP on a very successful Public Meeting in Dundrum in relation to the removal of the 48A Bus service a couple of weeks ago.

The meeting was packed and I thought Chaired very well and fairly by Deirdre Cronin.

It was perhaps noteworthy that the only Public Representativs to have attended were myself, (Dundrum is clearly way outside my area) and my Labour Colleague Aidan Culhane and towards the end of the meeting Eamon Ryan. Others sent their representatives but clearly they underestimated the local anger. I thought the two speakers from the platform gave a good account of the issues and hopefully collectively we can win this one. Unfortunately I have not heard of any outcome from the meeting but am pursuing the matter personally.

So for perhaps the first and only time in my life " well done to the SWP - on this you did a good job"

by Stunned also Thu Feb 24, 2005 04:44

"The point also Kieran makes of a revolutionary party having to be democratic - is of course fundemental more especially though in practice - as well as words"

His theory may be nice, but anyone outside the SWP who has tried to work with Kieran Allen politically knows that the theory and practice bear absolutely no relation to one another. The SWP don't show an interest in any cause unless there's something in it for them and their profile. Individual members may have consciences, but the SWP in Ireland is just a machiavellian, dictatorial, self-seeking sham.

by john - swp Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:13

The comment about Socialist Worker purely getting involved in movements for their own self-interest is just not true.

Currently the SWP is putting huge effort into building for the Bin Tax protest on saturday, which is vital at a time when the council are going on the offensive with non-collection.

We are also working very hard on raising awareness and encouraging people to come to the demonstration on March 19th as part of the global day of action against the on-going occupation of Iraq and palestine.

It is sectarian and begruding to make sweeping generalisations about one party or another.

Movements change and develop. Political parties are no different. You can see the new Irish Socialist Worker Paper (at www.swp.ie) is also trying to change with the movements, to contribute and build those movements.(while also obviously, as everyone with a political perspective does), engage with others in that movement to try and gain support for our particular perspective (that is building the revolutionary 'socialism from below' currents within the movements)

by Jonah Thu Feb 24, 2005 11:53

Just to say that I think the Socialist Worker's layout and design has improved immeasurably. I can honestly describe it as a newspaper now. I don't see the massive increase in content quality Davy's talking about, it looks mostly like the same old, same old repackaged and heated up but the layput improvements are worth congratulating.

by Zebbeddee Thu Feb 24, 2005 13:45

There is no contradiction between saying that the SWP put huge effort into doing something and saying that they do so for sectarian reasons. Sectarians often work hard.

To take your own example, does the SWP leadership think that a bin tax march at the moment is going to be a huge event that galvanises opposition to the charges? Or does it think that it will be a small event that could further demoralise opposition but still provides an opportunity for some paper-selling and attempts to recruit and posture as the real opposition?

The experience of pretty much everyone on the Irish left is that the SWP is impossible to work with in a fraternal way. It's not "sectarian or begrudging" to say it. It just shows a capacity to learn from experience.

by D Thu Feb 24, 2005 16:59

Hi, Jonah - I believe the British SW paper has improved greatly for the very points I have raised above. So we can differ on that

Zebbeddee your final point re - in relation to the Irish SWP hits the nail on the head in relation to oneself. As I have stated on numerous occasions - everyone makes mistakes it is though when one for self and organisational interests refuses to acknowledge them, therein lays the problem.

May it be a mindset -organisational or leader lead, that refuses to acknowledge mistakes and learn from them - I believe therefore if the case, that such will be detrimental in the long term .

Of course persons will raise such concerns against such organisations for sectarian reasons but as I have said time and again one cannot for self interest attempt to lump genuine concerns raised by genuine activists into the same pot as the sectarians.

Although I had a number of reasons for my leaving the SWP - fundemental to that though -despite what others say, think etc, was that very reason that some refused even to acknowledge let alone learn from mistakes.

Not only do I believe that that is a form of revisionism but for some activists they can then have little faith of calls made by those very said people. More especially in times of grestest urgency or in situations of serious concern. Of course dogamatism, abstraction, the 80´s mentality etc etc give succor to this and are all part of that problem.

Finally I will say in my own experince i have found that some other organisations are far far worse - at times the sectarianism was so emmense it had been dangerous, this in very real terms for activists. All this wil be recorded as well as my time in the SWP on its PC etc etc in a book I am working on.

So while of course it is important that genuine activists concerns or criticisms are listened to and raised, it is also important to give credit where credit is due. This as I have done on many occasions in the past in relation to various organisations and individuals - including the Belfast SWP and as I have done now in relation to the British SW paper for the reasons given.

by . Thu Feb 24, 2005 18:22

Once again Davy comments from the side lines of the struggle!

Davy attacks the past struggles of the SWP withour having any evidence of the charges been put against them.

Ask yourself,

why could Davy not get anyone in the SWP to agree with him?

Why did he not stay and fight for his ideas?

How much will his book cost?

by D Thu Feb 24, 2005 19:26

I am indeed going to bite at this one - as will have no access to computer for several days


Comments from the sidelines of the struggle? hmmmm I don`t really agree with that one

Davy attacks the past struggles?

hmmmmmm now there I was being criticised for giving praise to the SWP in this post - now i am being criticised for what another believes that are charges I raised against them hmmmm ' funny old world.

And the amount of times I was criticised in the past for ´- praising - the SWP time and again - Hmm I just can´t win´

Why could Davy get anyone to agree with him - On What'?

I left because the organisation was being moved in a direction that was not for me. Other people I presume where happy with that, as they still remain. I was not .

Why did he not stay and fight for his ideas' -

Ideas where not the main difficulty at that time - organisational method and style of old was .

The Belfast SWP -and it was common knowledge held within the left -worked -differently from other parts of the SWP. But that had started to change - did I raise it yes - did others yes - did I argue against it yes.

As for evidence - I am unsure what you are talking about. I will write all such events as I had documented and remembered them.

Others of course can document and write their own accounts as they aleady do. With that then others can judge on each`es merit if they so choose

Just to finish as I have said time and again I hold a lot of respect for many members of the SWP as I do others in organisations and none -and work closely with many of them still - fraternally -within several campaigns and movements.

SImply - I will write as I have also done -as I see things. Some will like what I say - others will not .

All I seek to do is put the facts as I see it and let others read and judge this as I have always done. Others in turn can do similar - I suppose in part that is what politics is all about.


Finally once again - Credit where Credit is due to the British Socialist worker - Will be a regular reader - Signing of D

by K Moran - SWSS TCD Thu Feb 24, 2005 19:47

I was slightly puzzled when after maybe a month and a half of a new SW in ireland, new layout, less sensational articles, articles by non-swp members involved in other campaigns etc etc etc that there was no mention of it on indymedia.

Given that we have in the past, been lambasted regularly for selling our 'crap' paper and how 'crap' it was was discussed quite freely on this site you would imagine that when we changed it at least some of the critical rigour so freely offered, be given to positive developments as well as negative.

But no, just silence, a telling silence

And ultimately perhaps, not so surprising.

by Dermot lacey Thu Feb 24, 2005 19:57

Hell! Just as I start praising the SWP you all start attacking it. I am sure there is a moral there somewhere.

by . Thu Feb 24, 2005 20:06

Yes Davy, sidelines. Where have you been since you left SWP? you have dissappeared from activity. Off to write your book?

As for your disagreements, why did you not stay and fight your corner? Instead you take off and declare your decision to leave in the Irish News, hardly the act of a comrade!

by Zebbeddee Thu Feb 24, 2005 21:38

I'm not sure why you expected faster comment about the new improved formula Socialist Worker here. The old version was generally viewed negatively but it was only talked about here sporadically. You launch a new version and within three issues a thread appears on it.

I've had a look at the new version and I think that the layout has improved. I don't think that the colour element is much of an improvement though as the pictures are so low quality in the print version. I don't like the smaller format particularly.

As for the changes in content, well I've enjoyed a couple of articles in it which isn't something I would previously have said very often but both those articles were by non-members. One of those articles, by Laurence Cox consists of a thinly veiled attack on the SWP's general behaviour.

by padraic - 1 of Indymedia Ireland Editorial Group - Indymedia Ireland Thu Feb 24, 2005 21:44

"I was slightly puzzled when after maybe a month and a half of a new SW in ireland, new layout, less sensational articles, articles by non-swp members involved in other campaigns etc etc etc that there was no mention of it on indymedia."

Well the whole idea of indymedia is that it provides a forum for people to express their ideas. There was and is nothing stopping you from writing about the new layout and all the rest.

"But no, just silence, a telling silence. And ultimately perhaps, not so surprising."

Right, because indymedia is a giant conspiracy against the swp? Like i said nothing stoppng you writing thoe articles. I only heard the other day about the change of editor and the new focus of the paper, why not tell us more about it, maybe put some images of the new layout up etc etc?

by Badman Thu Feb 24, 2005 23:33

I've been wanting to comment on the new paper launch for a while, but have held back through a bout of uncharacteristic charity and restraint. Since this has obviously not been appreciated, here's Badman's review of the new socialist worker.

Firstly, it obviously looks way nicer. The graphic design has moved on enormously from the long established "lets see how much red and black in HUGE TYPE we can squeeze onto the page". The pictures and paper, however, are too low quality to really justify the shift to full colour. You end up with a product that looks okay at a glance but is a bit murky up close. But still a huge improvement.

The content has improved a little too. The articles by others in the "movement" mean that there is occasionally something worth reading in it, while the frantic, sensationalist tone has eased a little. The political analysis remains, unfortunately, as simplistic, opportunistic and blinkered as ever.

Still, it's too early to say if the slight improvement in content is more than a blip. The culture of the SWP is deeply engrained and is strongly characterised by an absolute refusal to engage with any genuine debate with others on the left. They practice absolute dismissal of alternative viewpoints and barely acknowledge the existance of a movement beyond the party. By opening up their paper to the movement, even in such a superficial way, they could find that the leadership's control starts to be challenged, that their more thoughtful members start to get the oxygen of debate and feel confident enough to raise dissident opinions within the party. By toning down their hysteria, they might find it more difficult to motivate their 'passing through' junior membership to throw themselves wholeheartedly into their revolutionary duties of selling the paper and recruiting. Thus, it is quite possible that they will revert back to type before too long.

Beyond the content and look of the paper, there is the far more interesting question of how and why this new look came about. The British SWP launched a new look paper on October 13th 2004, just before the ESF. A long editorial by editor Chris Bambery explained the reasons for the relaunch and the "opening to the movement". See: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/article.php4?article_id=2727

The editorial was aimed as much at members as it was at readers. The decision was made by the leadership without any consultation with the members and thus it was necessary to hand down the new line on the exciting new developments that ushered in the huge new opportunities to engage with the movement in its period of tremendous growth. At least they did bother to explain their reasoning to their readers.

It has long been a common criticism on the left that the SWP's international has been run in the traditional colonial manner, with the London leadership taking decisions and the local leadership following slavishly. On several occasions whole sections have been expelled by London without so much as consulting the other members.

So, imagine my surprise when, a couple of months later the Irish SWP decides to relaunch their paper. They adopt colour, a new layout, a new masthead, and express their openness to the movement - and their excitement at it all naturally. The funny thing is that all the changes are to an uncomforatable degree, exactly the same as the changes to the British paper. Except in this case, rather than a long article in advance of the change, they carry a tiny piece in their editorial of the first issue after the change which basically expresses a short summary of the British editorial.

The SWP claims that their international sections are independent and make their own decisions. The SWP also claims that their sections operate in a democratic fashion. These claims are extremely implausible. If they were the case then we would have to believe that their memberships in both countries democratically decided to adopt the same design many years ago and stick with it for decades, despite the fact that it was appalling looking. Then, through some amazing coincidence the memberships, after a period of independent democratic debate, decided to update it and adopt the same new look , identical down to the masthead and fonts.

Now, this hypothesis is, of course, possible. But Occam's razor dictates that we should adopt the much simpler and less wierd hypothesis that the SWP is indeed a party that operates centrally and hierarchically in every facet. Big decisions are made in London, handed down to local leaders from where they are dictated to the membership. Not exactly consistent with the values that they espouse in the new launch!

by D Fri Feb 25, 2005 12:20

The last few seconds as I am abroad


Badman some interesting points.

By - Since leaving the SWP I have been active as Chair of the Anti Racism Network in the North organising with others gigs - activities etc. I have also with others launched an activist publication with the publication organising events of support and solidarity

I also lend solidarity to many other events which activists would be aware of from Palestine to Anti War etc - and much more besides. And oh yes there is that book that seems to trouble you so - might give you a mention.


Finally, as stated before, I did not declare my decision in the Irish News - I sent out e-mails to the activists Networks and if journalists have signed up to such networks then there is little I can do about that. And if they see my leaving as News then that is of little concern to me. Although it seems to be to you.

Why I sent out my reason for leaving is that I am very very fully aware as how organisations can seek to invent their own reasons as to why a person left rather that the real reason that they left.

That still is the case today - that is why I state and stated my reasons as so people have a choice as to what they think is the case, or what they are told - and being told - by some, and the real reason that - I - choose to leave.

I have already made all these point before on Indymedia as regular activists would be well aware.


Really must dash - cannot come back as no access to a computer for a while. Signing of D.

by dave - swp Fri Feb 25, 2005 13:24

Mr Badman confuses his subjective opinions with fact.
The changes in the irish paper, which are ongoing, are a result of a long process of debate and discussion in which the entire membership of the swp took part. It was a major issue at our national conference, national committes over the last couple of years, at branch meetings etc. Furthermore a special meeting for members was held in which the all aspects of the paper were debated and voted on. All of the above meetings were open to all members. we also took into account the entirely justified criticisms of non-members. Dozens of people also regularly take part in the writing and production of the paper and we welcome contributions from anyone who is involved in the broad movement. I don't think we could be any more democratic than that.
People should read the paper on the net and make up their own minds.
By the way, working in connection with activists in other counties has got nothing ton do with colonialism. Socialist Worker Britain published an excellent eyewitness report from Fallujah last week which we reprinted this week. Is that colonialism or co-operation.? Seems like internationalism to me.
By the way i doubt if the person giving socks to davy is really a member of ours.
I don't confuse the real spirit of indymedia with the negativity displayed above. The vast majority of stuff on this site is excellent and much needed.
Good luck I am going back to listening to The Others new album ain't it fuckin excellent?

by D Mon Feb 28, 2005 11:34

Hi Dave - back from abroad

Good to see those long overdue changes beginning to take place