The Irish Socialist Network has sent a message of solidarity to the Scottish Socialist Party.

by Kevin Thu Oct 05, 2006 01:59

No doubt some good people were attracted to the WP by the sheer uselessness of the Labour Party; who could blame them? But I have also had dealings with ex-stickies in other roles. Many of them now have jobs in 'community development', running FAS schemes, local parterships etc. All of the worst cynics, and abusers of workers rights I've come across in that field have been ex-stickies. That party seems to have bred a particularly venomous form of cynicism in some of its members. And that's without even mentioning Eoghan Harris... I know that the 'loser left' does exist. It is a real thing. There are certainly people on the left who make continued rule by Fianna Fail look like the best option for the moment. But the dog rough cynicism of a party that produced both Pat Rabitte and Eoghan Harris hardly seems like a better alternative to anything.

by Dan Sun Oct 01, 2006 23:30

All I can really say to that Fran is, chill out, it'll be ok, no need to get yourself so worked up. You'll give yourself a heart attack at the rate you're going...

by Fran Sat Sep 30, 2006 02:04

Dan,

The sticks had a serious working class base while clearly arguing a socialist line. While a rump of the party were supporting the fucken loons of the world, the huge support (in leftie terms) either didn't know or give a fuck. But where is their legacy? The support going to SF who are dying to go into coalition with just about anybody.
Having lived in Glasgow for a while I do know the potential of the SSP but unfortunately they have fucked it all up because the 'loser' left would rather destroy something than not control it.
No doubt you come from a slightly different class background where the irrelevance of the SSP is actually important. If you inhabit the same universe as the left, real world issues don’t impact on you. I would rather have 1 "contaminated" stick than 10 useless middle class losers.

by Dan - ISN Thu Sep 28, 2006 18:04

Fran, I'm honestly curious to see where you're coming from. Unlike some of my older comrades in the ISN, I was never a member of the WP - by the time I got involved in politics, they'd long since shot their bolt. But apparently you think the Stick background of many ISN members is something to be admired.

I presume you respect the WP for the fact that they built up a serious base in working-class communities in the 1980s (especially in Dublin), not for the fact that they supported the North Korean dictatorship and other atrocious regimes. But it remains true that the WP sent its young members (including some of my current comrades) to North Korea to see what a socialist society looked like. If that didn't mark them out as "loony left", I don't see why sending a letter of support to the Scottish Socialist Party is such a terrible thing. Despite the bitterness of the split, neither side has accused the other of mass murder (not yet anyway...).

Anyway, I'm not sure what grounds you have for dismissing the SSP as "a bunch of losers". If the mark of a "loony left" sect is their total disconnection from reality as most working-class people experience it (I'm guessing this is what you have in mind, correct me if I'm wrong), then the SSP certainly don't deserve to be called "loony left". Their activists (from both camps) have been involved in real political struggles in Scotland since the anti-poll tax campaign, and they've put down real roots in communities. Before the recent split, they weren't far off reaching the level of the WP in the mid '80s.

Oh well, each to his own I suppose

by Fran Thu Sep 28, 2006 01:08

Colin my friend, I would love to help but I'm not from Finglas. I haven't given out an anti bin tax leaflet in over two years since the looney lefties fucked up the local campaign. My original point was that I thought the ISN was different than the rest of the looneys given their stickie backgrounds but when I see that bollox about two bunches of fucken losers in scotland I know that I was wrong. Looks like its back to waiting for the left of SF to split from the party! And I don't mean Stuart's pretend splitters!

by Colm - ISN p.c. Wed Sep 27, 2006 16:36 breathc at hotmail dot com

Its all a matter of words isn't it? When one writes 'The ISN want to make an electoral alliance with the SP' the implication is that the ISN is chasing after the SP. On the other hand 'The ISN are in favour of a left electoral alliance including the SP' despite sounding the same, has a different connotation: it means its our position, just like the SPs, but its not the be all and the end all.

The truth is, as any informed ISN or SP member knows, that both organisations are in favour of a left electoral alliance, but with (different) provisos. The ISN has been involved in various efforts with others to bring about cooperation on the left, including discussions on electoral alliances. We offered to work for Clare Daly in the last general election and our offer was happily accepted by the SP. We discussed the last local elections with the SP (on their request if I remember correctly but I might be wrong), a discussion that centred primarily on the possibility of the SP running a candidate in Finglas and our attitude to that idea.

The impression being given by some of the postings above is that the ISN is running along in the wake of the SP pleading for an electoral alliance and, frankly, its rubbish! We work with a number of left groups constructively, despite our differences, but such work and discussions are not confined to the SP. We work with the WSM in anti-war activity, we were involved in close cooperation with the CWAG in the last local election and we work in the anti-bin tax campaign with members of the SP, SWP, SF etc.
As for having different positions on whats happened in Scotland, Im fairly sure the SP does not make decisions on who they work with on the basis of what position they have on Scotland...but if they did that would be their problem, not ours.

Oh and Fran, since your worried about the working people of Finglas, we have 7000 Anti-Bin tax leaflets to distribute over the next few days, so you can contact me at the above email address and we can arrange for you to help....would 1000 be enough for you or will we put you down for more?

by John - ISN - Personal capacity Wed Sep 27, 2006 13:10

I am aware that the ISN was involved in a process to have a slate of candidates endorsed by the Anti Bin Tax Campaign that didn't actually happen. If I recall correctly the slate involved more than just the SP and ISN and the SP wanted it as much as the ISN. The negotiations came to nothing because the ISN, SP and others could not agree on who should or shouldn't be on the slate.

Any contact between the CIL and the SP is just that, between the CIL and the SP, irrespective of who attended. I repeat, I am unaware of the ISN meeting and asking the SP for "an election alliance" as Tonto calls it.

Should such a meeting happen I'm sure the SP would look at the "objective conditions" rather than what the ISN position on the split in the SSP is, before making any decision.

by sp member Wed Sep 27, 2006 11:08

maybe you are unaware John but the ISN wanted to be involved in an election slate with SP at last local elections and over last few months the ISN with others has approached the SP to be involved in an election slate for the next election. The ISN is also part of CIL which calls for left alliances and for the Sp to join with them.

by John - ISN - Personal capacity Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:30

"but I would say the CWI in Ireland will note what they have said and it will not be forgotten when the ISN next ask them to join them in an election alliance!"

When did that happen? As an ISN member I have no recollection of us ever asking the Socialist Party to join in an election alliance. I did however work, with other members of the ISN, to try to get Claire Daly elected, assisting with her campaign. Thats the only time I recall asking the SP anything and the question was did they want our assistance in their election campaign to which they replied, yes.

by John - ISN - Personal capacity Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:30

"but I would say the CWI in Ireland will note what they have said and it will not be forgotten when the ISN next ask them to join them in an election alliance!"

When did that happen? As an ISN member I have no recollection of us ever asking the Socialist Party to join in an election alliance. I did however work, with other members of the ISN, to try to get Claire Daly elected, assisting with her campaign. Thats the only time I recall asking the SP anything and the question was did they want our assistance in their election campaign to which they replied, yes.

by Tonto Wed Sep 27, 2006 10:07

Lone Ranger don't waste your time arguing about this it doesn't matter what the ISN think about what is happening in Scotland but I would say the CWI in Ireland will note what they have said and it will not be forgotten when the ISN next ask them to join them in an election alliance!

by ISN member Wed Sep 27, 2006 00:57

I admit it. It took us weeks to write that statement. In fact, we had to abandon all other work for a period of five months to put it together.

Get real!

by Fran Wed Sep 27, 2006 00:41

Good to see the ISN spending valuable time and energy on issues which are really important to the Irish working class. The prols of Finglas must be chomping at the bit to get involved in this stuff. Could even be an election issue next May!

by pat c Tue Sep 26, 2006 19:04

Heres an article by Stephen Low from the New Stateman. Its pay per view so I'm posting the full article which isn't very long. There is some free stuff at the New Statesman and you can view one of the pay stories gratis per day.

pat c

Observatons: Splitting in Scotland
Stephen Low
Monday 25th September 2006

"Embarrassment just doesn't cover it," was Tommy Sheridan's comment on his mother's rendition of "The Impossible Dream" at the launch of his new party, Solidarity. He might equally have been referring to the vitriolic split that has torn the Scottish Socialist Party in two.

Sheridan made headlines over the summer when he won a defamation case against the News of the World over lurid allegations about his private life. Off the back of that, and because of the lack of support from erstwhile comrades, he left the party he helped found.

The effects are likely to be felt well beyond the fractious far left. Many believe that the SSP will now lose most or all of its six seats in the Scottish Parliament in the elections next May, and since Scotland's current Labour-Lib Dem coalition has only a five-seat majority, that could open the way for the Scottish National Party to win power or for the Greens to be asked to join a coalition.

Such possibilities, however, continue to be upstaged by the remarkable intensity of this storm in a far-left teacup. "Liar" is an almost routine term of abuse. We have also heard "scabs" (Sheridan on his opponents), "another Jeffrey Archer" (various on Sheridan) and most hurtful - given the Trotskyist background of many involved - "Stalinist" (everybody about everybody else).

It came to a head when, on consecutive days, both sides held rallies in the same hall. First was the (official) SSP, whose leaders are facing down the claim that the only people upset about Sheridan winning his court case were Rupert Murdoch and themselves - a project not helped by the appearance of "Never Forget, Never Forgive" T-shirts. Next day marked the "historic" launch of Solidarity, possibly the only founding conference in history featuring the leader's mother doing her Matt Monro impression.

Meanwhile in the Scottish Parliament, the warring parties need to reach some form of accommodation. Speaking rights in the parliament are based on party strength - and two separate parties of four (SSP) and two (Solidarity) don't reach an important threshold. Negotiations are under way to ensure they are treated as a "Socialist Group".

And the political difference between the two parties? One is in favour of an independent, socialist Scotland. And so is the other. Both claim to be the genuine political alternative, and are about to embark on a fierce electoral battle, principally with each other. Things can only get bitter.

Stephen Low is a journalist with BBC Scotland and producer of The Party's Over? The rise and fracture of the SSP. Listen at [http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/radioscotland]

by sper Tue Sep 26, 2006 12:12

Prole if you want to know what the CWI thinks of all of this then read the articles on www.socialistworld.net and you will see we are not "bedfellowes" of the SWP.

by Prole Tue Sep 26, 2006 11:10

Which side are you on?

A false comparison if ever there was one. A wee bit like saying if you oppose BinLaden then you support Bush. Cop yourself on. You must be either SWP or CWI, strange bedfellowes indeed when you consider that the SP in Ireland consistantly argue that the SWP are actually counter revolutionaries - I kid you not - just listen to their general secretary, its his favourate rant. I'm sure that the CWI position is purely driven by their hate for the 'splitters' who told London to take a hike, and did a solo run.

by Lone Ranger Mon Sep 25, 2006 18:38

The other ISN member and Tom eile are you being serious. The both of you have either no real knowledge of what happened or maybe you are conscious reactionaries to make statements like you have.

by tom eile Mon Sep 25, 2006 18:24

I agree ISNer , except that Sheridan wasn't acting alone - he was supported by the CWI and the SWP . Hard to prove but my view is that there was a state conspiracy -aided by Murdoch- to smash up the SSP which was getting too much of a serious grip on Scottish workers . Sheridan's corrupt life -style allowed the NOTW to snare him ,his vanity dragged the SSP through a disasterous court case ,his stupidity allowed him to convince himself that the jury's verdict would be the end of it all. It won't be .

by Anti-Mozza-Fan-Club. Mon Sep 25, 2006 16:24

As Gorgeous "meeow-meeow" George said, "I think Tommy has had his fair share of Horse-Whipping already".

by ISNer - ISN Personal view Mon Sep 25, 2006 10:43

The ISN statment is probably too soft on TS. The man single handedly attempted to destroy one of the few left success stories in western europe in the 21st centuary. He deserves to be horse whipped for his betrayal. of the working class. Solidarity with the SSP the ONLY socialist alternative in Scotland.

by ISNer Sun Sep 24, 2006 22:04

The statement expresses solidarity with the SSP not any platform within it. There are four platforms still in the SSP and many non-aligned members. The ISN is not backing a UL 'line' but the general position of the SSP which is also the position of the RCN and Workers Unity platforms (dont know where the SRSM stands). No one involved in this messy affair had a perfect position but the SSP as a party is a clearly aclass struggle anti-imperialist party in comparison to the mish-mash of individualists and London-directed groupings that constitute Solidarity.

This debate has degenerated into a ridiculous 'you support Murdoch cos you support the SSP' name-calling session. Time and the relative sucess of both parties will tell who adopted the correct position, so I suggest we wait and see and return to it when the facts on the ground have proven the ISN correct or otherwise.

by Lone Ramger Sun Sep 24, 2006 19:48

The ISN statement puts them on the side of the United Left who backed the NOW, that much is simple. The money received by Sheridan post the trial has been donated to Solidarity. It is one thing taking advantage of the circulation of a newspaper to write a column which is read by tens of thousands of working class people is is quite another to give evidence for the NOW.

by ISNer Sun Sep 24, 2006 16:25

If this statement puts the ISN supposedly on Murdoch's side then everyone who supports Tommy/Solidarity is on the side of the Daily Record whose millionaire owners are rabid Blair supporters. Remember Tommys not only writes for that paper but received a large sum from them post-trial. But of course neither is true and the real struggle here is not about tabloid rags but different conceptions of a party and the importance of internal democracy. The ISN needs no line from anyone about internal democracy becuase since its foundation that has been a hallmark of the orgnaisation.

by Lone Ranger Sun Sep 24, 2006 14:44

"While closely following the development of the SSP, we have never tried to slavishly follow a particular model, and we know the comrades in the SSP respect the right of socialists in different countries to chart their own road towards liberation. True internationalism is based on an equal cooperation and respect between parties, not dictation from distant ‘centres’ or instructions from all-powerful leaders."

The above section of the ISN statement is an attack on Tommy Sheridan, the SWP and the CWI, therefore it isn't just a statement of solidarity with the SSP. If the ISN are back tracking from this statement then say that. As is normal with the ISN because you are a grouping that only agrees on vague generalities, that doesn't have a developed political programme and normally comes out with that liberal escape clause, we have no right to comment on what is happening in your country crap then you tend to try to please all the people all of the time.
However on this occassion your statement emphatically comes down on the side of the United Left. You have issued an uncritical message of solidarity to the SSP that does not criticise them for supporting Murdoch, hence it implies, no it cries out support for the tactics and actions of the United Left in relation to the court case and the subsequent witch hunt of Tommy Sheridan.
The ISN statement also includes "We salute your firm stand in favour of internal democracy, equality, and accountability". There is no need to read between the lines this is a parroting of the arguments of the United Left.
You also say "Like many, we are dismayed by recent attacks, both personal and political, on SSP members. We are glad to see that the SSP has rebounded from recent setbacks, to continue challenging capitalism in Scotland by building a class struggle party fighting for an independent socialist Scotland". This section is like all of your statement it is written without mentioning certain details so that you can say "no we didn't mention Tommy Sheridan etc", but do you think we are all stupid. Are we to take it that the reference to being dismayed at personal attacks on SSP members refers to the 11 leaders of the SSP who went to court to give evidence for the News of the World against Tommy Sheridan and therefore your dismay and concern is for comrade Tommy? We all know this is not the case.
Conor J. McGowan says "The above posts amount to nothing more than the creation of the kind of groundless, baseless false dichotomy that George's Bush or Galloway would be proud of – you’re either with Tommy & the Scottish working class, or you’re with the News Of The World, and Rupert Murdoch".
This is not a false dichotomy in the class struggle in the last analysis it does come down to whose side are you on. And in the struggle against the NOWs attempts to destroy Tommy Sheridan and the SSP (because that was their target) it came down to this - Would it be better for the Scottish working class if Tommy Sheridan won the court case or would it be better for the Scottish working class if Murdoch a reactionary billionaire capitalist won. The United Left decided it would be better if Murdoch won, and have since said they will support the NOW in its appeal. The ISN statement gives uncritical support to those who sided with Murdoch.

by Conor J. McGowan - ISN (Personal Capacity) Sun Sep 24, 2006 12:31

If anyone wants to post a political analysis, ISNers will gladly engage in debate with them. The above posts amount to nothing more than the creation of the kind of groundless, baseless false dichotomy that George's Bush or Galloway would be proud of – you’re either with Tommy & the Scottish working class, or you’re with the News Of The World, and Rupert Murdoch. Our statement neither mentions the NOTW or Tommy Sheridan, but gives an expression of solidarity with the SSP, and our political reasoning behind it.

You can read anything you want if you look between the lines. I'd suggest you look at the words on the page instead.

by d'other Sun Sep 24, 2006 04:50

What questions exactly? What questions? The ones that greet me hysterically about the SSP siding with the N of the W and the like? Oh get a life and then present us with a political argument to engage with as opposed to your tantrums.

by Lone Ranger Sun Sep 24, 2006 00:23

Is the resignation letter of Kevin Williamson your answer to the above question? If so it is irrelevant and does not answer the question. And the opinion of a Scottish nationalist on the crisis in the SSP and what socialists should now do in Scotland is also not relevant - you might as well post a link to an article by Alex Salmond!

by d'other Sat Sep 23, 2006 22:37

Oh get real. Could any of you drum up a political analysis among ye that didn't real on the strenght of personalities and political egoes?

http://myresignationletterfromthessp.blogspot.com/2006/....html

by Shocked Sat Sep 23, 2006 22:26

What the HECK! That is amazing... How the heck do the ISN side with the the UL faction and the News of the World!!! The fact of the matter is working class people of Scotland greeted the victory of Tommy Sheridan over NoW with applause and joy. The SSP leadership has cut off its nose to spite its face and has no future as an organisation of the working class.

by Lone Ranger Sat Sep 23, 2006 21:53

Reading between the lines is this a declaration from the ISN that they supported Rupert Murdoch and the News of the World against Tommy Sheridan?