SP paper online today

by intersted observer Sun Jun 12, 2005 10:47

Notice that there is an article talking about the need for a new mass workers party etc to the left of labour that looks to the newly elected left wing leaders/ bureaucrats/ awkward squad to launch the initative.
Mark Serwotka from the PCS is backing Respect, Bob Crow called for a Green vote I think, and Tony Woodley from the T and G is a stauch Reclaim Labour head. The left lost out in recent UNISON elections... Several London FBU branches voted to give political funding to Respect candidates...

How does this figure with current SP observers? Yours courteously,
the Interested Observer

by observed Mon Jun 13, 2005 01:33

, the spers want a new party launched by trade unions, a sort of small, big party. Not one launched by the rival left parties, always been that way however worded. Can also read "not the swp" according to ex general secretary dermot connoly

by andrew johnson Mon Jun 13, 2005 01:53

http://members.lycos.co.uk/socialistdemocracyie/Homepage.htm

by Amused Mon Jun 13, 2005 02:17

It looks as if one of the five members of Socialist Democracy is going to post a link to their article on every single thread they read until somebody actually reads the thing...

by sper Mon Jun 13, 2005 02:40

are quite good, the one on the cultural impact of reality tv is brilliant. Check it out.

by puzzled Mon Jun 13, 2005 09:27

If the articles in the current issue of the SP paper reflect the current line of that party (they always do) its fine to join up to a new leftish party led by left social democrats and including the hated SWP....in Germany and conditions are ripe for a new party led by left trade union leaders...in England and, wait for it, now is the time to launch a new non-sectarian left party....in the North. In fact it seems the south of Ireland is the only place in the world where the conditions are not right for having a new mass party.

Just reflect on the mindboggling illogicality of that last one: according to the SP the objective conditions are right to launch a new broad left party in the North, despite the abysmally small level of support for left groups and the absolute dominance of sectarian parties. The only proviso is that 'one or two' unions need to be involved. How can anyone take this seriously, how can any member of the SP swallow this line: that it now is the time to launch such a initiative in the North but not in the South!

Of course this analysis has nothing to do with 'objective conditions' at all, but with the relative strength of the CWI in each country: In Germany this the CWI are just a small element in the new WASG so they had to join to be part of a project that was going to happen whether they liked it or not. In England the SP have suffered from increased marginalisation and see the creation of a broad party led by the left union leaders as a way to regain influence. In the North, they can safely call for the creation of anything they like because the objective conditions are so difficult that there isn'nt a hope in hell of any intiative suceeding. In the South the SP believe that they dont need a broad party, that the SP is doing fine by itself and will continue to grow, winning two or three seats in the Dail in the next election. So their refusal to countenance any new formation has nothing to do with 'objective conditions' and everthing to do with their assesment of their own partys growth. If only they had the honesty to admit this.

by "the socialist" reader Mon Jun 13, 2005 14:41

i read the same articles and got a different view than the above poster. from what i can see the cwi are quite consistant. in germany there are much much bigger movements against the social cuts of schroeder. there is an electoral group set up, the wasg. in britain there is a strong mood against blair due to his right wing policies. if a new party were established there would be a good level of support from the working class with many probably joining and getting active. in the north it is important to put forward the view that there is a need for a working class party with working class politics and not sectarian politics. this does not mean that at this stage in the south there should be a launch of a new party. there are not the number of activists or potential activists that wil join a new party. i agree with the socialist party on this one. i think that there is a need for a new party in ireland. but if launched now it would only be a collection of small political groups.

by oot Mon Jun 13, 2005 15:28

Some of the movements of northern working class in last few years, social work dispute, civil service dispute, dessian dispute, fire fighters dispute, pensions dispute, education dispute. These disputes are still mainly limited to public service workers but it is an indication of a general upturn in class struggle in the north.

That would provide the basis for the first steps towards a new party of the working class. In the free state things are not quite the same. Apart from the bin tax campaign there have been no major class struggles in the last period. I think the approach of raising the issue in the north has more meaning at this point but the sooner it can happen in the south the better.

by puzzled Mon Jun 13, 2005 15:48

The SP members who have posted are avoiding the point. The article about the North is quite clear : that the time is right to launch a new left party, if only one or two unions would take that initiative. Now it is patently ridiculous to argue that the conditions are better in the North than in the South for starting up such a new party. By any measure (electoral gains, number of activists, social struggles etc) the conditions in the South are more advanced.

But in a way the goal posts are being changed because we are now being told that the article on the North really means that the time is right for advancing the call for a new party in the North, not actually starting one. So we are presented with the even more barmy idea that the time is right for socialists in the North to promote the concept of a new party (though not initiate one) but even such a modest step would be wrong in the South! I return to the basic truth behind all this: the leadership of the SP in Ireland are not interested in building a new party because they believe that, effectively, the SP is that new party (in the South). Why not just come out and say it? Why all the dissimulation and theological squirming? Why not say openly what is said internally: if you want ot build a mass party of the working class join the SP and help turn it into such a party?

by revo Mon Jun 13, 2005 16:15

I'm alway amused at this discussion. People come on accusing the SP of everything under the sun. The Socialist Party do not and never did see themselves as the new party. They see themselves as a revolutionary party with revolutionary politics. Electoral success does not equate with being a broad mass workers' party. There will have to be more than ineffective lefts such as Seamus Healy and Des Derwin to have a proper party. From what I can see this attempt at a new party is being pushed by people that have a wrong view of the level of working class struggle. There is also a hint of electoral opportunism by some given that an election is on the horizon.

by Mark P - Socialist Party (personal cap) Mon Jun 13, 2005 17:20

Firstly I wish that the various people on this thread would use their own names or at least a consistent psuedonym. It's clear for instance looking up this thread that some contributors are in my own organisation but refuse to stick to one identity. At least one of the contributors who is trying to appear to be in the Socialist Party is almost certainly not. The people who are criticising the Socialist Party are for the most part in "rival" left organisations but don't have the honesty to state it openly. All this "puzzled", "sper", "socialist reader" stuff just encourages dishonesty and unneccessary vitriol. Much better to state your opinions and stand by them.

On the main issues raised:

The Socialist Party makes it abundantly clear, internally, externally and any other way you like that our organsation will not grow independently into a mass party. We simply don't think that revolutionary parties are built by the gradual accumulation of members. That simply is not how these things work. We've argued consistently that the way forward is for the creation of a new mass workers party, much broader than ourselves, in which revolutionaries would organise and argue for our ideas and programme. That remains our strategic goal.

We do not think however that conditions are right in the South for this goal to get any kind of echo at the moment. There is no support in the trade unions for such an idea, there are no new layers of activists clamouring for it, general levels of struggle in society are near an all time low. If the small number of existing activists who criticise us here were to be honest with themselves they would hardly be able to argue with this. It is a straightforward statement of fact. And wishing it away or pretending that things are otherwise won't change that. Impatience is not an analysis.

It's worth remembering, as our anonymous critic seems confused on this point, that even were the objective circumstances more favourable we would probably not take the view that the way forward is for small left groups to launch a new party. We would expect to see the idea of a new party gaining significant support in the trade union movement for instance.

In the North and in England we have seen recent strikes on a scale much greater than anything we have had in the South. The workers movement hasn't suffered from the debilitating effects of decade after decade of partnership agreements. Even still we do not argue in either of those places that the small left groups should launch a new party. Instead we do our best to push the idea within the trade union movement and other venues where large numbers of workers are organised. In the North and in England the general social profile and electoral support of the socialist left is weaker than in the South but the left is stronger in the unions and more importantly has been able to get a certain echo for the idea of working class political representation there. The strength of the socialist left is not the key point because we don't primarily look towards these existing activists to launch a new party.

Even still, the North and England are less clear cut as examples than Germany or Brazil. In the first two cases we are at a stage where we can bring the arguments for a new party into the workers movement and get something of an echo. In the latter two cases significant moves towards a new party are actually underway. In Brazil and in Germany very significant social movements have taken place, directly leading to initiatives which could become mass workers parties. In so far as there is any "model" (and I don't like the term) this is how we see a new party coming into being in Ireland. To put it very simply, there will inevitably be an upswing in levels of working class struggle and out of that the question of political organisation will be posed.

In the meantime the Socialist Party is trying to accomplish two things. We are trying to strengthen our own forces, to strengthen revolutionary organisation in this country. More generally we are doing everything in our power to encourage working class struggle and thereby help to create the conditions in which a new party of the working class can be born. I think that through things like the water tax, bin tax, GAMA dispute and so on we make a contribution to this massively out of proportion to our numbers.

When a new mass party comes into existence the Socialist Party will join it and build it. We will not however dissolve into it. Instead we will seek to build a revolutionary organisation within this broad party, as our sister organisations around the world attempt to do in Holland, Brazil, Scotland, Germany, Italy etc. It's important to stress this because the Socialist Party is not just about helping to create a new mass party. We are dedicated to the socialist transformation of society.

by Anon O. Mouse Mon Jun 13, 2005 17:50

"It's worth remembering, as our anonymous critic seems confused on this point, that even were the objective circumstances more favourable we would probably not take the view that the way forward is for small left groups to launch a new party."
AND
"Even still we do not argue in either of those places that the small left groups should launch a new party."

I don't think anybody involved in any other initiative is putting this forward but it's a nicely packaged spin that should be easily swallowed by the puppies.

by Slievenamon Mon Jun 13, 2005 18:07

Revo, whats your definition of ineffective? Seamus Healy belongs to an organisation with seven council seats (more than the SP has), a Dail seat, a consistent record of opposing service charges at a local level and a highly effective local organisation of trade union and community activists. Des Derwin is president of DCTU and achieved a good 22% vote in the election for vice president of SIPTU against the bureaucrats candidate, with the backing of all the left in that union, including the SP. Now where does that leave your 'ineffective lefts'?

by Mark P Mon Jun 13, 2005 18:07

How surprising. Somebody pops up to add some anonymous abuse to the thread.

I am well aware that the people involved in the campaign for a new party or whatever it is called are not suggesting that the left groups should just declare a new party. I welcomed that as a sign of a certain realism on the thread about that initiative. I didn't attribute a view on this issue to them or to any other initiative. Thus far they have not made it clear how they see a new party coming into being. I'm sure they will elaborate on their views in time.

I am explaining the Socialist Party's point of view. Even where we think that a call for a new party would get an echo, we would not look towards a realignment of the existing far left as the key way of advancing that goal. This is an important point, not some kind of "deflection". I am trying to make it clear that we are not in favour of trying to substitute small left groups for the working class. If you agree with me well and good.

by AOM Mon Jun 13, 2005 18:22

"I am explaining the Socialist Party's point of view. Even where we think that a call for a new party would get an echo, we would not look towards a realignment of the existing far left as the key way of advancing that goal. This is an important point, not some kind of "deflection"."

Why make the point if nobody else is? It has all the hallmarks of a line being developed to deal with a new development.

As to being anonymous check this link. Original poster would be who now? Que sera, sera.

by Mark P - SP (personal cap) Mon Jun 13, 2005 18:46

There are people on the left who do want to see a new left formation of some kind immediately, most notably but not only the SWP. There are others, like this new campaign, who have a more sensible attitude even if I still think they are misjudging the objective circumstances. It wasn't immediately clear to me what particular angle our anonymous critic was coming from so I tried to express the view of the Socialist Party as clearly as I could on each point which may be contentious.

I think it's important that the Socialist Party explains our view as clearly as possible so there are no misunderstandings. We have put a lot of effort into thinking about the way forward, about why we need a new party, what the limitations of a new party may be and how we get to one. On this site we get endless whining from the same anonymous people about how we don't really mean what we say. Frankly I don't want to leave any room for misinterpretations.

On the other issue you raise I don't see what point you are making. I've expressed over and over again my disagreement with the use of multiple psuedonyms. As I said above that goes for members of every left organisation, including my own. At least at the link you give the poster isn't using his/her anonymity to maliciously attack "rivals" on the left, which is more than can be said for many of the contributors here. On a related note I don't think that anyone should be posting here under names like "SP" or "sper" or anything similar as it can give the impression that they are officially representing the Socialist Party when that is not in fact the case.

by Gerry Mandering Mon Jun 13, 2005 18:54

Nice to see the SP scoring an unprecedented 92 votes at Queens. This marks excellent progress since the bad old days when Jon Anderson could only scrape 350 for the SWP.

by hs - sp (personal capacity) Tue Jun 14, 2005 00:04

Mark has explained the position of the party very well and I think it's pretty much how it is. The left in Ireland (north and south in my opinion) is probably at one of it's weakest points ever, in real terms. As in basic class struggle, stikes, militant workers etc and in political and more abstract terms as in support for our groups and in terms of support for our parties and idelogies.

On the other hand we could be wrong on whether it's too early to make left formations, if that is the case I am looking forward to us all being collectively wrong. I can't see people clamouring to join the new formation but I hope they do. Unfortunately though it seems the swp are banned and the sp won't be taking part so it'll be a difficult process, but over time you never know.

More likely though there will be people involving themselves in workplace and community issues first and probably a lot of independent candidates, not to mention a further rise in Sinn Feins vote.
Through this process hopefully a decent amount can be won over to socialist ideas. And from there a new pluralistic party can be launched.

But for all those who are attacking the party for not taking part, absolutely nothing is stopping yourselves. (unless of course you're members of the swp and in that case why are you defending the new formation at all?)

by hs - sp (per cap) Tue Jun 14, 2005 00:22

good general explanation and history of the sp and various links, if ya like it join it.

http://www.answers.com/topic/socialist-party-of-ireland