 The Wholesome Photo of the Month Thu May 09, 2024 11:01 | Anti-Empire
In 3 War Years Russia Will Have Spent $3... Thu May 09, 2024 02:17 | Anti-Empire
UK Sending Missiles to Be Fired Into Rus... Tue May 07, 2024 14:17 | Marko Marjanović
US Gives Weapons to Taiwan for Free, The... Fri May 03, 2024 03:55 | Anti-Empire
Russia Has 17 Percent More Defense Jobs ... Tue Apr 30, 2024 11:56 | Marko Marjanović Anti-Empire >>
A bird's eye view of the vineyard
Alternative Copy of thesaker.is site is available Thu May 25, 2023 14:38 | Ice-Saker-V6bKu3nz
Alternative site: https://thesaker.si/saker-a... Site was created using the downloads provided Regards Herb
The Saker blog is now frozen Tue Feb 28, 2023 23:55 | The Saker
Dear friends As I have previously announced, we are now “freezing” the blog. We are also making archives of the blog available for free download in various formats (see below).
What do you make of the Russia and China Partnership? Tue Feb 28, 2023 16:26 | The Saker
by Mr. Allen for the Saker blog Over the last few years, we hear leaders from both Russia and China pronouncing that they have formed a relationship where there are
Moveable Feast Cafe 2023/02/27 ? Open Thread Mon Feb 27, 2023 19:00 | cafe-uploader
2023/02/27 19:00:02Welcome to the ‘Moveable Feast Cafe’. The ‘Moveable Feast’ is an open thread where readers can post wide ranging observations, articles, rants, off topic and have animate discussions of
The stage is set for Hybrid World War III Mon Feb 27, 2023 15:50 | The Saker
Pepe Escobar for the Saker blog A powerful feeling rhythms your skin and drums up your soul as you?re immersed in a long walk under persistent snow flurries, pinpointed by The Saker >>
Interested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
RTEs Sarah McInerney ? Fianna Fail supporter? Anthony
Joe Duffy is dishonest and untrustworthy Anthony
Robert Watt complaint: Time for decision by SIPO Anthony
RTE in breach of its own editorial principles Anthony
Waiting for SIPO Anthony Public Inquiry >>
Voltaire, international edition
Netanyahu soon to appear before the US Congress? It will be decisive for the suc... Thu Jul 04, 2024 04:44 | en
Voltaire, International Newsletter N°93 Fri Jun 28, 2024 14:49 | en
Will Israel succeed in attacking Lebanon and pushing the United States to nuke I... Fri Jun 28, 2024 14:40 | en
Will Netanyahu launch tactical nuclear bombs (sic) against Hezbollah, with US su... Thu Jun 27, 2024 12:09 | en
Will Israel provoke a cataclysm?, by Thierry Meyssan Tue Jun 25, 2024 06:59 | en Voltaire Network >>
|
People before Profit - meeting on women's issues
 national |
anti-capitalism |
news report
 Monday March 13, 2006 12:18 by Cathy Swift - People before Profit Catherine.Swift at may dot ie 086-0679708
Tigers of a different stripe - women in 21st C Ireland
Third of a series of public workshops and discussions on issues of topical importance to Irish citizens - hosted by People before Profit, a group of community activists who seek to deepen links between individual campaigns through cooperation and mutual support. Speakers included Niav Keating of BODY, Mary Muldowney of Alliance for Choice, Goretti Horgan of SWP and NI Anti-Poverty Network, Anna Pas - Polish journalist working in Ireland and Orla O'Connor of National Women's Council. Meeting was chaired by Ailbhe Smyth of WERRC, UCD. (If anybody has views on what they would like to see discussed at future People before Profit meetings please contact Cathy Swift) Tigers of a different stripe: women in 21st C Ireland
On Friday 10th March, People before Profit held their third public forum, this time on the role of women in 21st C Ireland. Ailbhe Smyth of the Women’s Studies UCD and a member of the People before Profit Steering Committee chaired the meeting. Introducing the concept of People before Profit, she described how a group of community activists had decided to come together to create a forum in which current issues in Irish society could be questioned, debated and critiqued. The aim is to push back neo-liberal policies which are crushing public spirit and adversely affecting peoples’ interests and well-being.
The first speaker was Orla O’Connor, Head of Policy at the National Women’s Council who spoke on childcare. This is an issue which clearly affects all parents but the lack of affordable childcare impacts particularly strongly on those on lower incomes and particularly on lone parents and part-time workers. Women figure strongly in these groups with 32% of women working less than 33 hours per week as opposed to 7% of men. Where both parents are working, it is generally the woman’s income which is spent on child-care.
O’Connor stressed that the issue of childcare had been ignored at a political level because of ideological reasons; childcare is seen in Ireland as the private concern of families and, in particular, the concern of women. This was clearly the premise behind the marriage bar in the civil service but this thinking is still evident even today and informs the thinking of many of the key decision makers both in the civil service and in politics. The majority of these, she noted in passing, are men whose families are grown.
The context in which current discussion of childcare has begun has been the negative impact on economic growth and the need to facilitate women’s return to work or training after child-birth. In discussion of the 2006 budget, no consideration was given to the possibility of a national child care system and instead, emphasis was put on provision within private homes.
The Women’s Council, in contrast, favour a publicly funded and accessible childcare system along the lines of those operating in the Scandinavian countries with a system of funded parental leave. Subsidies for childcare should be available to parents both at work and on social welfare and these should be on a sliding scale, so that the maximum resources are directed towards those on lowest incomes.
The second speaker was Mary Muldowney of Alliance for Choice speaking on abortion. She gave figures of 7000+ women who are still going abroad to Britain and Europe for terminations and estimated that 1 in 10 Irish women may have had an abortion. The picture of traumatised young women presented by those who were anti-abortion was very far from the truth and instead many women were married and already had children. Indeed, lack of proper childcare provision was cited as one of the reasons driving such women to make this choice. Trauma over the decision was significantly affected by the legal, economic and medical barriers erected by Irish society. For example, because of the need to acquire information and to travel, Irishwomen are the highest % of those presenting for late abortions in Britain and this, in turn, makes the procedure more invasive.
The current situation in Ireland has resulted from the consequences of the X case but we still have no legislation which takes those decisions into account. An attempt in 2002 to reverse the consequences of the X case through referendum was defeated and the silence on abortion is slowly beginning to end. The reality was that abortion had always existed and if Ireland did not have the ability to export its problems, illegal, backstreet abortions would exist in some number here. In fact, it is known that, amongst those emigrant women who cannot easily leave the state, such abortions, sometimes, botched, have already begun to occur. The cost of an abortion (including travel from Ireland) is approximately 1000 euros and thus is often an inaccessible option for lone parents or those on low income.
Alliance for Choice believes that access to comprehensive family planning is essential for Irish women and that access to abortion should be one element within that total package. There is, however minimal political will for such an option. The Labour Party will legislate for the X case if they come to power but this will make little difference as the right to abortion in the case of suicide is not sufficient. Those who have in the past attacked the pro-choice groups have also attacked other developments such as the right to contraception and divorce and the claims that Irish society will dissolve if these rights were granted have not come to pass. Denying women the choice to avail of abortion has not and will not eliminate the social need.
The third speaker was Niav Keating of BODY, a pro-choice activist group. They believe in developing lobbying and mass protest techniques to draw attention to a variety of problems concerning women’s sexual health. Why, for example, should condoms be taxed at 21%, thus making them less accessible than they should be? Why is there still a lack of comprehensive sex education? The notion that simply telling teenagers that having sex should be avoided is not a realistic one. Since formation last December, BODY had already mounted a successful media protest involving building a cage of coat-hangers enclosing 17 women outside the Dáíl. This had achieved substantial publicity, in newspapers and radio. They are currently applying for funding from pro-choice groups. Speaking personally as an anarchist, she felt that lobbying politicians only brought about limited change as can be seen in the current position of the various political parties. Sinn Féín and Labour both support a small degree of change; the others have either no position or do not want change.
The fourth speaker was Anna Pas, speaking as a Polish women who was working as a journalist in Ireland. She had been disappointed by the lack of coverage of International Women’s Day which had been an important festival in Communist Poland, deriving originally from public protests about the low value given to women’s work. Since 1989, it still remained a day when women were presented with chocolates and flowers by their partners but had ceased to be a public holiday. However International Women’s Day still presented Polish society with the opportunity of asking questions about issues such as discrimination against gays and lesbians. On the whole, globalisation and emigration were providing Poles with opportunities to gain new experiences which were not open to them at home and increased the possibility of examining these issues with open minds.
The fifth speaker was Goretti Horgan, speaking about issues affecting poorer women in northern Ireland. Beginning with abortion, she pointed out that this was also a class issue in the north as it was not available on the NHS despite years of lobbying and recommendations by various bodies such as the Committee for Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Thus, northern women must travel if they wish to avail of this right and/or pay money to private, profit-making, clinics.
On childcare, the notion of publicly funded arrangements was anathema in a world where the State was increasingly seen as having no role. Tax credits for child care were disadvantageous to women on the lowest income and in fact, represent welfare for employers. Many pregnant women today are being faced with an impossible dilemma – having abortions is bad but choosing to have a child was also bad if, in anyway, this impacts on your ability to do paid work.
On other issues, neo-liberal policies and globalisation were making the lives of women ever more difficult and the work/life balance is increasingly skewed. Women are not only responsible for much of child-care, they are also increasingly responsible for care of the elderly and those within the family circle suffering ill-health or disability. Access to welfare is being increasingly tied to employed work but this removes the woman from her family and forces her to accept low-paid, low-status and often part-time or contract work which makes it difficult to carry out the other responsibilities which society has delegated to her. We have to accept that much of the woman’s role as society has defined it to date is as valuable as that of paid jobs and, unlike such employment, it is work which must be done locally and cannot be outsourced to Singapore. It is not enough to say that women must seek jobs in managements positions or as judges and MPs – such women will employ other women (often migrant women) to act as nannies for their children; the question for society is “who will look after the nanny’s children?”
Ailbhe Smyth, summing up the speakers’ presentation, drew attention to yet another aspect of exploitation, one to which attention has been drawn at a recent conference of the Association of African Women in Ireland. This is the genital mutilation suffered by all too many and the lack of supports for women in Ireland who might have suffered this barbarity. The twenty-first century was not only bringing different forms of old problems – it was also presenting new problems for what in many ways was a new society. The materialism which is often vaunted by our politicians and media presents collective action as a synonym for shopping in Dundrum; People before Profit seeks instead to recognise the real needs of real people and, acting together, to improve the situation.
Discussion from the floor referred to the American Workfare system (where to get welfare, you must work a certain number of hours) and the increasing effect of this idea the Irish Social Welfare system, symbolised by the use of the term “activisation”. Questions raised included: should we be using terms such as “working class women” when issues such as short term contracts, agency work and lack of career opportunities affect us all? Why is feminism now a dirty word and why do so many modern women support a ‘raunch-culture’ which is almost facilitating soft porn? Why do so many women voluntarily agree to support their partnership (with or without children) by accepting the junior role? Is a system which involves both partners pursuing careers with equal urgency compatible with setting up joint households?
One proposal for concrete action involved a protest to the partnership talks by women with collapsible cots or with buggys to highlight the need for resolution of issues such as child care. (That SIPTU is happy to simply support tax credits was seen as an abdication of concern for the less well off.) It was also suggested that a letter showing solidarity with women in Iraq should be written. Finally it was agreed that the whole range of People before Profit discussions, from public transport to health, should have at their core, the effect of such policies on both men and women and that women’s liberation should be one of the key issues for the organisation.
The next People before Profit meeting is entitled "Your health - whose business?" and will be held at the IFI. Eustace St., Dublin on April 7th at 7:30. Anybody wishing to suggest other topics for meetings or who would like to organise a People before Profit meeting in their own area are asked to contact Cathy Swift at 086-0679708 or people_beforeprofit@yahoo.ie
|
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (39 of 39)
Jump To Comment: 39 38 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1One of the most critical things affecting women today is the weakness of their representation in the media. Despite the alleged advances of the last few decades, most coverage of women's issues in the press is depressingly sexist. In a recent special, double-page spread in the Irish Examiner devoted to advising those with SSIAs how to spend their loot when it arrives next year, one of the suggestions made was that people might like to have plastic surgery. This was accompanied by a photograph of a naked blond woman, perfectly proportioned and strategically arranged so that nothing 'naughty' was on view. Aside from the nauseating premise for the article, there are a few questions which arise : the tired old assumption was that matters of mere personal appearance are what preoccupy us; that our appearance was flawed unless we all resembled the bimbo in the picture; that we should consider cutting up our bodies in order to remedy our physical deficits. For any gents reading, there was the stereotypical eye-candy. And the same eye-candy was prominently displayed on the front page for good measure - bound to pull readers in. Nothing sells like a naked woman. (Sad also to see animal rights activists resorting to the same approach, but thats another story).
Suggestion for anyone concerned about the position of women in Ireland: An online women's media newswire just like this one, run for and by women would have terrific potential to grow into a real force for change if it was run as well as this one is. So far as I am aware, the writers of the software which runs this site are giving it for free to those who would like to set up similar news services - the objective being to encourage as much direct 'grassroots' contribution to media discourse as possible. I beleive the adminsitrators of Indymedia.ie would support an initiative like this in solidarity with the struggle women are still facing in our drive for equality and approprite representation.
One other point. I know they are important issues but why do so many women's discussions still revolve around our biological functions? Could we devote more attention to, say, women in politics? The role of women in protecting the environment (a huge issue since women actually do most of the spending in the average household, [on food, household goods, on children etc etc] whether or not the income is their own)? The workings of sexism? Most averagely decent Irish men are still hopelessly, impenetrably sexist when it comes to subtle forms of sexism. The patronising paternalism of our political elite is an urgent example of how how our chauvinisim is affecting everybody very badly and if we are looking for reasons why our government no longer listens to its voters, we could do a lot worse than consder the matter through the prism of its sexism. PDs and FF are fundamentally chauvinistic about everything - environment, business, social welfare, social justice,policing, Iraq War whatever. It is almost the defining characterisic of all that's wrong with the country, imo. Most politicians still adress women as if they were five year old children. Female politicians do nothing but ape their male counterparts and participate in the male-defined system which is wholly unsympathetic to their perspective. (Mary Hanafin is a good example: making her way up that pole by demonstrating her eagerness to show that, when it comes to tough, she can out-tough any of her male counterparts. At the expense of, e.g. children with special needs. Atta girl, Mary, you've rightly identified the winning formula for success in Fianna Fail. We won't even start on Mary Harney.) One woman of my acquaintance - a senior university lecturer in social policy was greeted at her front door by two FF politicians asking to speak to her husband. When she enquired why, they explained they were campaigning for his vote in the forthcoming election...extreme, I know, but that was only at the last election. One of them was a sitting TD.
We need our own press, urgently, and something like this very newswire would be the best way to go about it?
"come the revolution" what SWP thing to say...
Look, I have my problems with the SWP. I was a member for almost ten years but left because of those problems. However, I can say hand on heart:
1. They are genuine socialists who want to do their best to change the world
2. They work hard within campaigns and it's just not true to say this is only for the purposes of recruitment etc.
3. There are many campaigns - from the Anti Amendment Campaign and the Reagan Reception Campaign in the 1980s to the anti-war movement more recently that the SWP threw itself into while the rest of the Left were still trying to figure out exactly what their position would be.
4. I don't think my ten years in the SWP were wasted. Quite the opposite. I learnt a lot, gained a lot of confidence and now look at the world in a whole different way.
So why am I not a member today? Well, first of all, it took me another ten years to get to the position where I didn't just HATE the SWP. It's only since the run-up to the Iraqi war that I have learnt to appreciate them again! Also, as I say, I had my problems and I think they are still there - which means I could not go back. But I have no doubt that come the revolution, they will be on the right side of the barricades. And I'm not too sure about some of the people who have posted here!!
I didn't count myself but I was told by someone who did that number was 65. The upstairs room at the IFI was full and people were standing on the stairs listening at various points.
Cathy
Any idea how many people attended the PB4P womens meeting? Did anyone do a rough headcount?
No, I'm not particularly interested. I read and try and engage with the comments which get posted - both on the articles I post and those which others have posted on topics which interest me. I can see that a number of people have problems with SWP but they never seem to provide enough detail to be convincing. Instead there's a dark series of comments about "if only I knew" etc etc.
Somebody suggested that I should talk to a number of different groups to learn what I should know, groups such as Grassroots. Fair enough and if I meet these people I will - I have met some of the people which commenters have suggested I talk to such as Joan Collins at Pb4P meetings (she spoke on the Waste one) and I've heard at least one anarchist at the women's issues meeting, namely Niav.
On the other hand, I have to say that I'm quite busy - I don't have every weekend off to go to meetings and it would be much more efficient from my point of view if people just posted the details of why they have problems with the concept of working with the SWP and why I should take account of their problems. The most specific comments - such as the one above to which I replied at length - don't seem to me to be sufficiently convincing to stop working with those SWP people who, in my limited acquaintenceship with them, seem to share some of the values I share.
The other thing which strikes me is that this continued interest in identifying SWP elements within Pb4P is an awful distraction from the topics which Pb4P have meetings about. This started as an article on women's issues - would anybody like to go back to that?
And for those who are interested, the next Pb4P meeting is "Your Health - Whose Business?" in the IFI on April 7th. Suggestions for topics for other meetings would be very welcome.
Cathy
"I'm not particularly interested in becoming an expert in past campaigns led by the left and the rows or disappointments that may have arisen from these."
How can you just stick your head in the sand and ignore what they have done in the past and continue to do, all this from honest commited activists who have been there and been burnt by the swp, those who have learnt the hard way, listen to what they have to tell you. It's not sectarianism either, most of these other groups and parties do work with each other and quite often, it's just the SWP that have left a sour taste in so many peoples mouths. As for michael y's contention that their are anarchists and SF involved in the IAWM, all I can say is; ha!
"If the SWP said openly that it is currently the dominant force in Pb4P"
I think I've said clearly on this thread (see above) that as far as I was aware, People before Profit was an SWP initiative started at Cassidys but that on Updater's testimony, it looks as if it was originally inspired by the work of the group in Ballymun People before Profits
"that most of the local contact people are SWP members",
key word here is contact I think. I've already said that we don't have much links as yet between the various groups and that its mostly done by word of mouth
that the local branches are based around local SWP branches
haven't said that but yes, that does seem to be the case in most cases
BUT that every group starts somewhere and they genuinely intend these organisations to some day be much bigger and broader than the SWP
I haven't explictly said this here but certainly that seems to me to be the implications of a situation where an SWP initiative has produced Pb4P groups where SWP are not in the majority (as I've indicated clearly is the case on the "Steering" Committee
there would be no issue to discuss here That would be fair enough.
Great! So we're not arguing are we?
What people object to (and by people I mean pretty much everyone else on the left) is the subterfuge. The pretence that these already are broad movements, much broader than and independent of the SWP, which are springing up around the country.
I don't think I (or indeed anybody else that I know of) has been pretending that its a broad movement YET though we hope it will become one. Everything I've posted on this issue talks about embryonic, beginnings etc.
We don't object to that because we are "anti-left" or because we don't do anything ourselves or because we want to undermine "the movement". We object to that because dishonesty is politically corrosive. We object to that because all of us have at one stage or another played your current role, that of useful idiot, in an SWP front.
I really can't see the rational behind this 'useful idiot' phrase or calling me naive (as above). I'm volunteering my time and enthusiasm because I believe in the concept that was articulated at Cassidys last November and I'm prepared to invest effort into trying to help ensure that concept gets developed. If it doesn't work, who has lost?
"We object to that because we think the left can organise itself more effectively."
Ok - probably you can. As a People before Profit/Davitt League person all I can say is we're trying to organise as effectively as possible, given constraints like earning our crust and so forth. Part of that effective organisation is accepting the help proffered by SWP (who started this particular ball rolling) and when local SWP people agree to help start up Pb4P groups (and not everybody in the SWP would be interested in so doing), that benefits us all
Finally, I know people have been accusing me of naive etc and I appreciate that some have knowledge of past campaigns where you felt disappointed by SWP but from my perspective, everything that's been done to date by Pb4P, I've been happy to have been involved in and I see my ultimate target as the authoritarian powers being used and abused by figures such as McDowell and those who want to crush local communities in Ireland - I'm not particularly interested in becoming an expert in past campaigns led by the left and the rows or disappointments that may have arisen from these.
Cathy
Please read my comment again - your anti-swp fixation, in the name of "honesty", obviously blinkers you. Those of us, soft idiots as far as you are concerned, who are involved in movements along with swp, lp, sf, Green and anarchist militants do not have the swp as the centre of our world. What they do and what they say is their business and as such open to criticism or support on a case by case basis.
Over 500 people across the country, for example, came to iawm meetings during the last 2 weeks to listen to two US militants visiting Ireland as the guests of the iawm. Yes the swp militants were active, among many others, in organising the meetings...but our concern was to get people, women and men from all walks of life, to start being active against the war. To come to the demonstration on Saturday...to push this government to stop supporting Bush...to end complicity and the use of Shannon as a warport.
It would be possible to rant about the fact that the swp was prominent in all this work. I choose at this moment to look at the process without paranoia...as for the rest of the left, the SPs, the SFs, the Greens, the LPs and the anarchists...you tell me which one from them is devoid of sectarianism...devoid of trying to manipulate movements... Think of what I am saying again....put your prorities in building in a way that does not allow small sectarian organisations taking control. At least to that extent we agree. As for being my friend....it will take a bit of time methinks. Lol.
MichaelY, my patronising friend, you have a cheek to assume that those of us who insist on a basic level of honesty in politics are somehow doing less for "the movement" than you are. There is no "fingering" going on here. The people who have been described as SWP members here have spoken to the mainstream media in that capacity at some stage or other or spoken at public meetings etc. Nor is there any attempt to push people into inactivity.
If the SWP said openly that it is currently the dominant force in Pb4P or the IAWM, that most of the local contact people are SWP members, that the local branches are based around local SWP branches BUT that every group starts somewhere and they genuinely intend these organisations to some day be much bigger and broader than the SWP there would be no issue to discuss here. That would be fair enough. What people object to (and by people I mean pretty much everyone else on the left) is the subterfuge. The pretence that these already are broad movements, much broader than and independent of the SWP, which are springing up around the country. We don't object to that because we are "anti-left" or because we don't do anything ourselves or because we want to undermine "the movement". We object to that because dishonesty is politically corrosive. We object to that because all of us have at one stage or another played your current role, that of useful idiot, in an SWP front. We object to that because we think the left can organise itself more effectively.
(few or) nobody ever said the rossport 5 was an swp front :)
Studying closely this thread, following the excellent initiative of the People B4 Profit group, one is struck by the very same pattern that has followed the initiatives of Anti-War Movement...a few 'knowledgable' pundits, with masses of 'inside' knowledge get onto their high horse and start attacking...on the surface, they 're telling everybody who cares, that these organisations, be they Pb4P or iawm, or Rossport 5, are in fact little more than swp fronts. In other words, they're really helping the rest of us who are in these organisations and not members of the swp that we're really wasting our time, we are being taken for a ride....that we should stop beong active in reality.
In fact, of course, these (usually) anonymous pundits are attacking frontally the work and the activities undertaken by a lot of good people - including swp members on issues like the War, like the exploits of Shell, like all those who care about the situation and the rights of women in our country.
At times, it comes as 'tactical' criticism - not demonstrations but 'direct action'.....not mass movement building but 'confrontation with the forces of authority [read:State]'....more often it comes as a straight anti-left(ist) tirade, finguring individuals, attacking identities, provoking division and fear.
So good friends, we are not paranoid...we are vigilant, we are organised, we are committed to social change, we are strong - we are in and out of the swp, in and out of the other parties, some of us are anarchists, others feminists, some trots, others (still) maoists.
And we ask for one thing only : get off our back, move your ass in a vadavoom way and do something....quit being a monkey on the back of the movement.
Sally, while your paranoia does provide a few moments of amusement, your claims are simply wrong. Perhaps before you accuse someone of lying next time you will first use that friend of the curious everywhere Google to examine the evidence.
Dick Roche is, or was until very recently, an SWP member. How do I know that? Because he has appeared in the local media in Waterford speaking on behalf of the SWP. What's more the SWP itself briefly declared on its website that he was to be its candidate in Waterford in the last local elections before replacing him with Roy Hassey. See links below:
http://www.waterford-news.ie/news/story.asp?j=13367
http://archives.tcm.ie/waterfordnews/2002/08/23/story24...7.asp
http://naih.pair.com/users/indymed/newswire.php?story_i...=true
I never claimed that Maura Harrington is an SWP member. What I did say is that reports have appeared on this website that she was selling Socialist Worker on a demonstration. That's true - such a report did appear. I also said that I have no idea how reliable such reports are.
"Details" says Dick Roche is an SWP member in order to spread suspicion.
Details is not telling the truth. Dick Roche is NOT an SWP member. Maura Harrington is NOT an SWP member.
Ask yourself this question: Whose interests does it serve to spread lies. Is it in order to discredit People Before Profi/Davitt League by falsely claiming there is something underhand and sinister going on?
Read these comments in the context of an attempt by those hostile to PBP and with an agenda of their own to foment divisions and suspicion in order to weaken PBP.
By all means air differences of opinions over Iraq and Islamism, but don't be taken in those who lie to destroy a worthwhile alliance.
Anon, Dick Roche is in the SWP. As for whether Maura Harrington is, I don't know how reliable they are but there have been reports on this website of her selling Socialist Worker on demonstrations. The only surprise is that the Ballymun number isn't that of Kevin Wingfield. Of the eight contact details given all refer to places where the SWP has a branch or an activist or two.
Note: Before anyone accuses me of fingering people for the state or any similar nonsense, nothing I've said above can't be found out through Google and the same goes for Anon's points about who various phone numbers belong to.
'Also It's fairly obvious from the website of the Iraqi womens FReedom organisation put a low priority on opposing the ocupation'
Thats a lie, and a fairly obvious one but its just what I would expect from the SWP. All you have to do is go to the website and you will see that Daniela is a liar. But why should she lie over something like that? Who benefits apart from the SWP? When it comes to Iraq and the Islamic World the SWP do not support Womens Rights; they support the Imams. This is obvious from their statements about Hijabs, the Cartoons and Iran. Nowhere in their Iran releases do they mention anything about the need for the present Iranian Government to be replaced by a Democratic alternative. This actually is the real way to defeat the Americans plans to invade Iran, to hold Democratic Elections.
These are from the website giving the lie to Danielas claims:
'On Wednesday the 22nd of February, Iraqi people witnessed the darkest day of their modern history. The new democracy, as designed by George Bush and reinforced by his ambassador Khalil Zadeh, has matured to the point where sectarian and civil war is only one tool of political pressure of one governmental group to get a bigger share in the government'
http://www.equalityiniraq.com/english/2006/YanarMuhamad...6.htm
'On an invitation by the women’s section of National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers, (RMT) Houzan Mahmoud representative of Organisation of women’s freedom in Iraq took part in the women’s annual conference of RMT which was held in Gloucester on 24th & 25th February.
In this conference Houzan spoke about the current political situation in Iraq, and the continues struggle of Iraqi women against both occupation and Islamism in Iraq. She stressed upon the importance of solidarity with women’s struggle for freedom and equality and for ending occupation. '
http://www.equalityiniraq.com/english/2006/HouzanMahmud...6.htm
'Mohammed showed a surprising clarity of concepts and contagious energy when narrating the dual struggle faced by members of the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI) , which she chairs: against the Islamic fundamentalism and Arab nationalism that oppresses women, and against the US military occupation that has maintained the country under US rule for almost three years.'
http://www.equalityiniraq.com/english.htm
These are just from the front page, theres a lot more if you go to the Archives or Articles sections.
http://www.equalityiniraq.com/english/archive/archive.htm
spot the swper, no one else would come up with a sentence like that!
See http://www.people-before-profit.org
look at contact info
Contact Us:
E-mail: People Before Profit
National: 086 0679708 or 086 1523542
Dun Laoghaire: 087 6329511
Ballyfermot: 087 9090166
Ballymun: 086 4058789
Mayo: 087 9591474
Waterford: 087 7523464
Derry: Socialist Environment Alliance
...search
National: 086 0679708 Catherine (Ind-Waterford)
or 086 1523542 Rory-SWP
Dun Laoghaire: 087 6329511 Richard Boyd Barrett-SWP
Ballyfermot: 087 9090166 Brid Smith- SWP
Ballymun: 086 4058789 ?
Mayo: 087 9591474 Maura Harrington (Ind)
Waterford: 087 7523464 Dick Roche WCTU?
Derry: Socialist Environment Alliance McCann etc
Why is something automatically bad because the SWP had a hand in it?. Surely PB4P was a good thing by all accounts. its goals, aims, motivations seem on the right track. So what if there were people involved from SWP?. One problem with a lot of activism is in-fighting and dissapation of energy which could be better directed at the real problems. If activism in this country is ever to achieve its aims then we need to stop infighting and form alliances on important common ground with other groups willing to get up and do things. We need to show the maturity to be able to agree to differ on other matters. If the SWP is active on certain issues that we happen to agree with then great, join them on the street. You dont have to join their political party if you dont agree with their other opinions but their effort for the particular common cause is still worthwhile even if you believe their political philosophy is not. Even if, as people seem to believe, they might try to take credit for any success their members are involved with, while very impolite, this is not the end of the world if there really IS a success to take credit for. Whats really important here? Surely the positive outcome of the action for society, not who gets the pat on the back. If thats not the case then you are an activist for the wrong reasons.
From what I see here on indymedia, one could cause a whole mess of infighting with a simple anonymous post . If I were a neo liberal provocateur, I would be laughing my ass off at the face of Irish activism. This is a weakness we cannot afford to have in the face of what we are dealing with.
Activists, lets try to put aside ego and petty differences and try to work together on our common ground. I am not a member of the SWF nor have I ever voted for them but I have seen their members actively campaigning on several important issues and I commend that effort as I commend any other activist effort towards the betterment of our society. It looks to me like PB4P is another such worthwhile effort. I commend it and ALL who had a hand in making it a success, whatever their personal political affiliations.
My thanks to Updater for his correction re Ballymun People before Profits (with an s). As I said, everything is very embryonic at the moment and there is no system for linking up what goes on locally with what goes on in our committee (of the People before Profit/Davitt League to give it its full title) other than word of mouth. Clearly errors and misunderstandings can creep in with this method - on the other hand, there are many of us who feel that any closer form of communication could involve hierarchies - should the "steering committee" steer for example and if so, who should they be steering? Would it be better for local groups to forge their own way or if the idea is to grow as a large movement, do you need to have some degree of unity? Does that have to involve pushing a party line or can simply the exchange of information empower us all, at least to some limited degree?
For example, I'm writing these comments and I'm posting articles as an individual - nobody has asked me to do it. Is that an imposition on people who have attended the meetings that we've organised? Judging by the comments earlier on in this thread, some people feel that I didn't do full justice to the occasion but surely it is better to have some sort of record of what went on - fallible as it may be for reasons of human fraility - and for other people to emend that record through comment as we've done here?
Reading the report on the Ballymun People before Profits group to which Updater directed me, it sounds to me as if it might be they who ultimately inspired the meeting in Cassidy's - if so, great! Where's the problem?
Looking forward to being educated further,
Cathy
We have been informed that:
'So far there are the beginnings of Pb4P groups in Ballymun, Artane, Dundrum, Bray, Dun Laoghaire and possibly Tralee but they are still very much in embryo form at the moment and we're still feeling our way.'
To anyone who has any knowledge of the geography of far left organisations, the pattern is blatantly obvious. All the above areas have active SWP branches and you can be sure about who's runnning the show in these local Pb4P groups. There are no Pb4P groups in any area where the SWP is absent. The pattern is exactly the same as the Irish Anti War Movement: have a nice broad steering commmittee with a SWP minority but make sure you control the local 'branches', which are just shadows of the local SWP branch.
I know that people like Cathy, Michael, Ailbhe are genuine activists but they are completely naive about the SWPs modus operandi, simply because they have little recent experience or knowledge of the far-lefts recent history and secondly because the SWP are love bombing them to make sure they keep them as a 'nice' cover for their front.
I would make a sincere suggestion to Cathy; if you reallly want a well rounded idea of what this is all about talk to other activists in the Grassrooots Gathering, Catholic Workers, WSM, Socialist Party, ISN etc etc and ask them why they wont touch Pb4P with a bargepole. It willl give you some food for thought.
"So far there are the beginnings of Pb4P groups in Ballymun, Artane, Dundrum, Bray, Dun Laoghaire and possibly Tralee but they are still very much in embryo form at the moment and we're still feeling our way."
I'm sorry to be the second person to comment on this same sentence but, leaving aside the issue of Ballymun People Before Profit having nothing to do with the national Pb4P Alliance, there's something else interesting about that list of locations. Yes, you've guessed it: they are all places where the SWP either has a branch or an activist or two. Which makes it smell a little bit like the occasional appearances of the "Rathmines Branch of the insert campaign here" we all know so well.
The point about the Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq is that the British SWP loathes them with a passion and does everything it can to discredit and attack them. So either the British SWP forgot to pass on the Irish SWP's orders on this or the Irish SWP just don't care enough to have a fight over it.
As far as I know Mary is contacting the Iraqi Women's group. She brought the leaflets to the meeting and asked that the motion was put to the meeting. As someone mentioned before there's nothing stopping anyone sending a message of solidarity to the group.
No Emily I am not a member of anything. However i do know, from long experience, that the swp have always been militant a supporter sof women's rights and I am sure teh same goes for women's rights in Iraq. I don't know what kind of problem you have with swp but please leave me out of it. Inquisition over? Also It's fairly obvious from the website of the Iraqi womens FReedom organisation put a low priority on opposing the ocupation
If you had checked out the site in any detail then it would be clear to you that these Women oppose the occupation. If you had even read the Appeal supported by the meeting (its just a few comments back) you would have read 'The war and the occupation of Iraq by the US and UK have opened the way for reactionary forces in Iraqi society to impose a constitution based on Islamic Sharia and other forms of religious-tribal law.' Perhaps you support the imposition of this Sharia law? Would you be so kind as to clarify as to whether or not you are a member of the SWP?
It looks as if no one from the PBPA is going to take responsiblity for contacting these Women. Is this because the motion passed by the meeting runs diametrically counter to SWP policy?
Like Daniella, I thought the Pb4P meeting was the best meeting on women I had been at for years. I have been at a few of their meetings and this was by far the best. As I said on another thread, I don't think People Before Profit is a front for the SWP, although people are always telling me it is. The reason I don't think it's a front is because SWP members go to a great deal of trouble NOT to impose their views when there is a disagreement. Also, they are always very careful to implement decisions that go against their arguments [even more so than ones that they supported!] so it is most unfair to suggest that if the Iraqi women have not yet been emailed it's down to them. I seem to remember the chair at the meeting, Ailbhe Smyth said she would ensure it happened so I'm sure she has. But it does seem to me that the SWP people cannot win - if they did the emailing, it would be proof that Pb4P is an SWP front. If they don't, then it's also proof that it's a front!
Having said that, it is most unfair on them to say that they would have been opposed to supporting the Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq, given what was said in the leaflet. In fact I was sitting near Melisa from SWP and she said it was a good leaflet. Also, I have had long conversations with them about all this and it is clear to me that their concern about Islamaphobia is in no way giving in to the fundamentalists. In fact, they always make the argument made in the leaflet which was distributed on Friday night about Women in Iraq that one of the effects of the war and of islamaphobia is to strengthen the hold of the fundamentalists (just as the anti-Catholic laws here under the British strengthened the hold of the Catholic Church) and that those who want to see a secular Iraq/Iran/Middle East have to oppose Islamaphobia precisely in order to weaken the hold of the fundamentalists.
As to Daniela's question about the Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq, the leaflet made it clear that they do opposed the occupation - it says things like "The US-UK occupation has pushed Iraqi society back into a medieval world in which 'honour killings', beheadings, forced veiling and seclusion and sexual servitude are now a part of everyday life."
"So far there are the beginnings of Pb4P groups in Ballymun, Artane, Dundrum, Bray, Dun Laoghaire and possibly Tralee"
We'll already had on these pages a clear announcement that Ballymun People Before Profit has nothing to do with the SWP front.
Clearly I'm proving something about People before Profit by being disorganised! I haven't personally contacted the Iraqi Women group on the grounds that I didn't myself see the circular and clearly, as Emily has already pointed out, I didn't get the full drift of what was going on at that particular point in the meeting. I'm very happy to contact them but other than saying what has already been posted here, I'm not quite sure what I can add?
Just for the record, since it has come up, I'm not a member of the SWP nor (to my knowledge) are Ailbhe or Michael who did most of the organisation for the meeting (especially Ailbhe). One of the 4 speakers, Goretti Horgan, is an SWP member and People before Profit does have SWP members and the idea of this alliance was I think first born with them and they advertised it at a public meeting in Cassidys last November. I thought it sounded like a good idea and volunteered. What we do is we all make suggestions about what topics we think are worthy of discussion and the most qualified person in the area organises the meeting. Thus the first meeting on housing was chaired and largely organised by Michael Punch; I did the second one on Waste and Ailbhe did this one. (I've posted records of these - as accurate as I can make them! - on Indymedia.) The next one is on Health on the 7th April and we're all pitching in on that one.
The longer-term aim is to encourage local Pb4P groups to emerge around the country if this formula proves a success. (The meetings I listed above have been the set in train by what we grandly call our Steering Committee which is a group of about 15 volunteers - of whom 3 are SWP members). So far there are the beginnings of Pb4P groups in Ballymun, Artane, Dundrum, Bray, Dun Laoghaire and possibly Tralee but they are still very much in embryo form at the moment and we're still feeling our way.
What do people think about these ideas? Are there better ways of doing it? What would you prefer to see?
Cathy
Emily I really think your griping unneccessarily. And it seems a bit like you are just looking for some reason to cause a row. Cathy made a very reasonable response to your original, rather accusatory, comment. Why can't you respond in kind. You could for example have e-mailed cathy instead of fomenting a rather pointless public row, which looks to be motivated more by political point scoring then concern for women.
Also I have just checked out the Iraqi women's website. It's not clear whether or not they oppose the occupation, which of course is oppressing women and murdering them by the dozen. Do you any more about that? It certainly wasn't mentioned last friday.
It was a meeting organised by PBPA. The meeting decided to endorse the Appeal by the Iraqi Women. PBPA can prove that it is not an SWP (who are very well organised) front by contacting the Iraqi Women.
I was at this excellent meeting. It was probably the best meeting on Irish women's lives i'v e been at for years, and i've been to a lot, and fair play to cathy and the others who helped organise it. Might I suggest to emily that she e-mail the iraqi women herself about the meeting and teh vote which i endorsed. As far as I can see pb4p is a fairly adhoc and completely voluntary group so a bit of DIY on Emily's part might be more reasonable.
The meeting was not an SWP Front. Many of those involved in the Alliance would not be SWP members but I fear that it is controlled by the SWP. I will be very surprised if the Iraqi Women are ever contacted. Even if they are it will not be in the context of the motion passed at the meeting. Why hasnt the contact been made already? How long does it take to send an email confirming what occurred at the meeting?
I think the comment was a bit tongue in cheek but in fairness to the poster he/she is not that far off the mark. I presume People Beofre Profit is an SWP front?
Above comment is a cynical attempt to misrepresent what Cathys saying. Who ever post the above is trying to stir things and nothing else. At least Cathy is attempting to engage with others- that should be commended and not disrepected by posts like above- it should be removed. Idiotic comment. Thanks
Cathy is right, People Before Profit is yet another SWP front and all part of a sinister campaign by the SWP to hijack progressive campaigns, from women's rights to the Rossport 5 to worldwide Globalisation protests and by doing so wreck them.
The speakers all gave huge amounts of info - I couldn't get it down fast enough and even the act of writing probably means one misses things - any body else out there who can add to the record?
Cathy
Just to back what Emily said - in fact the meeting voted unanimously to support the Organisation of Women's Freedom in Iraq.
I also thought that it was a really excellent, lively meting that showed there is a real need for radical action around women's issues. Indeed, while we have to thank Cathy for her report (since no one else who was there posted one!), I do think that it did not really do the speakers justice as they were far more radical than her report suggests.
Dear Emily,
My apologies. It was right at the end of the meeting and some of the organisers were whispering details about paying for the room etc in my ear while the vote was being called for. Thanks a million for putting the record straight,
Cathy
Just to clarify the meeting didnt just decide to support Women in Iraq. It specifically decided to support Iraqi Women against Islamists. This was decided by a vote of the audience. Perhaps you didnt get a copy of the circular that was distributed on behalf of the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq. Just in case \there is any further confusion about the motion which was supported the text is here:
'The war and the occupation of Iraq by the US and UK have opened the way for reactionary forces in Iraqi society to impose a constitution based on Islamic Sharia and other forms of religious-tribal law. We the undersigned organizations and individuals condemn the introduction of religious law. We demand freedom and equality for Iraqi women and support their Struggle for a democratic, secular and egalitarian constitution'
There is another Indymedia thread which gives more information about the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/74476
The Spokeswoman for the Organization of Women’s Freedom in Iraq is:
Houzan Mahmoud
houzan73@yahoo.co.uk
Tel: +44 79 56 88 3001
www.equalityiniraq.com