jump to navigation

Some more old websites…. October 8, 2012

Posted by irishelectionliterature in The Left.
trackback

A while back  I posted links  to archived versions of Political Party Websites from 2000

A few older ones I came across recently

Joe Higgins Website from 1996

Militant Labour Website from 1996

CWI Website from 1997

Socialist Party Website from 1997

The Dublin Federation of Anti-Water Charges Campaign Website from 1996

 

 

 

Comments»

1. Scabby Rabbit - October 8, 2012

This is great. Cheers.

Interesting letter in the July edition of the Militant on that Militant Labour page:

[i][b]Our Name[/b]

Dear Comrades,

There are some points I would like to raise in relation to the discussion in the name of the organisation. Firstly I am very pleased that there is now an overwhelming agreement that we need to change our name. This is quite clear from the discussion so far.

However, the adoption of a new name is not so clear cut. I believe that one of the problems in our discussion is that too many comrades have picked a name they like, and then set about coming up with the political arguments to justify that name. This is putting the cart before the horse and completely misses the point of what we are trying to do.

I believe that one name has to be linked to our perspective of how we see the struggle to change society developing in the next few years, in particular what forces will emerge in the workers’ movement and how do we intervene to assist these forces to develop.

The first point to be taken on board is that the future political movement of the working class will have a socialist character. It is quite true that socialist consciousness has been pushed back in the recent period, due to the collapse of Stalinism and the collapse of the old reforminst left in the West.

This also has its positive side, in that Stalinism and reformism, i.e. labourism and social democracy are exposed as bancrupt ideologies. They will not feature in a new political movement of the working class. It is true that at this stage the main consciousness is against the effects of the market. This will become an increasingly anti market consciousness which will look for an alternative to capitalism.

The only such alternative is the genuine ideas of socialism. The process whereby a broad and new socialist consciousness will be developed will be greatly assisted by the intervention of an openly socialist party. By leading mass struggles, and developing workers leaders who openly call themmselves socialists, workers and youth will identify the word socialism with a struggle for change with people who really fight for workers’ interests, etc.

That is why it is crucial to put the word socialist to the forefront in our name. We have a duty and responsibility to develop socialism as the alternative to the market. I believe again that the majority of our members agree on this point.

The other point I want to deal with is on the word labour in our name. There were always two labour traditions in Ireland. We previously held the perspective that the left wing, socialist labour tradition would become dominant as Labour developed as a mass force, something it has never been able to do under the control of the right wing. Our orientation to Labour was in anticipation of this development.

But this perspective was not borne out. Labour’s right wing tradition, always dominant, is now all that remains in the Labour Perty. It has no attraction whatever to workers, either now or in the future. We have to make it absolutely clear that we have no identification with, or orientation to Dick Spring’s Labour Party. The socialist labour tradition which was a minority part of Labour in the past, will be developed as a force now outside Labour, by breaking decisively with Labour for these reasons I have a lot of reservations about calling ourselves Socialist Labour.

A party aiming to replace Labour, could of course call itself the Socialist Labour Party. But this implies a broad, mass force. A socialist party yes, but not necessarily a revolutionary, marxist party. When such a party develops, we will be part of it. If such a party calls itself the Socialist :Labour Party or Alliance, we will have to change our name from Socialist Labour. If this force adopts another name, callng ourselves Socialist Labour will also not make any sense, in fact it would send out a very wrong message as to what we stand for.

If we call ourselves the Socialsit Party now, again I believe this will create a confusion between what our organisation is, and the idea of a broad class struggle party. It may be that we could adopt the name Socialist Labour for a period, but I believe once a broader force emerges, which could be within the next year depending on the next general election, we will then have to change our name, to something like Socialist Alternative or Socialist Left.

Fraternally, Dermot Connolly [/i]

Like

irishelectionliterature - October 8, 2012

It looks as if there was quite a debate over the name…
Our Name
Dear Comrades,
The meaning of the term ‘militant’ is now less obvious than was the case in the past. By definition it represents the radicalised and politicised workers, but only in so far as it translates itself to the further concepts of socialism or the labour movement. In and of itself it no longer has a definitive meaning. The tradition of the term ‘militant’ has been forgotten and so its meaning is now context based. So in ‘militant nurse’ or in ‘militant Hezbollah’ you can equally and oppositely use the term.
It is the action of the qualifier that determines its meaning. However the solution is that ‘Militant’ has achieved a significant degree of publicity in relation to our organisation and this must weight heavily in its favour. Also we have the fact that 11,384 people in the Dublin West By-Election saw fit to vote for Militant Labour, not on the basis that they perceive it as a terror group but on the basis that ‘Militant’ was judged by its actions.
So while I agree with the need to remove the term ‘labour’ and include the term ‘socialist’, I cannot agree with the removal of ‘militant’ from our name. On the basis of ‘Socialist Party’ appearing to be a popular suggestion, I would further suggest ‘Militant Socialist Party’. However I feel the important point is the inclusion of both ‘Militant’ and ‘Socialist’ in whatever name we choose.
Yours Fraternally,
John Daniel
Dublin City Branch

——————————

Dear Comrades,
Here’s a short letter on my thoughts about changing the name. I’m against it. I don’t think it’s necessary and I don’t think people will start joining us by the wheel barrow full if we’re called Socialist Alternative just coz that’s a cool name (not).
I don’t think people think we’re Hamas suicide bombers and I don’t think people go away after talking to one of us and think we’re the Labour Party. We’re not called Labour and we’re not called Militant Busbomber we’re called Militant Labour.
Originally we we’re called simply Militant and I agree that some people thought that was a bit iffy sounding so we stuck on labour to it. Each word in the name balances out the other I feel. I think after the Dublin West by-election the organisation has gained a certain amount of attention and the name has been bandied about the place. There’s no good reason why we should confuse the issue now by changing the name. Also I think changing the name could look well dodgey coz it looks like we’re trying to hide something and that could be hyped up by the capitalist press. Lastly remember whether the name’s Militant or not that’s what the press will call us anyway (the organisation formerly known as Militant) and sure why not, coz that’s what we are.
Enda McGarry
PS I totally disapprove of letting bombs off on buses and think Spring’s a dick.

Like

Mark P - October 8, 2012

Yes, there was a lot of debate about a possible name change in the period just before Militant Labour became the Socialist Party. The arguments were prolonged because different names were seen to reflect different positions on somewhat more substantial questions: Things like what the organisation’s attitude to Labour should be, the difference between a Marxist organisation and a broad left one, what exactly a “party” is, etc.

Dermot Connolly was probably the closest thing Militant Labour had to an identifiable “leader” at this point, particularly in the South, and his view would have been the dominant one amongst the leadership as a whole. I believe that the proposal in the end was for the group to call itself Socialist Left rather than Socialist Alternative. However, most of the membership preferred Socialist Party in the end, primarily, as I understand it, on the grounds that it was better to be in line with the general understanding in Ireland of what the word “party” meant in Ireland than to worry about whether or not the group fitted traditional Marxist definitions of a “party”.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 8, 2012

Got to admit this is new to me, the Socialist Left name isn’t bad though I think SP is perhaps a shade better. Can you remember any other proposals during this period Mark P?

Like

Scabby Rabbit - October 8, 2012

I’d probably prefer Socialist Alternative to Socialist Party as it happens.

Like

Jolly Red Giant - October 8, 2012

As Mark sadi there was quite an intensive debate on what name to adopt in 1997. Mark is also correct in outlining that the leadership of the party supported the idea of ‘Socialist Left’ (preferred by Dermot Connolly who objected on an ongoing basis to the use of ‘Militant’) and Socialist Alternative. Socialist Left was dropped as an idea when one delegate at a National meeting gave a very good demonstration of a drunk in a pub pointing across the room at an old geezer drinking a pint and shouting ‘look – there is the only socialist left’

Mark is also right in that the rank-and-file opposed the name Socialist Alternative – the debate focussed on whether the word ‘Party’ should be in the name with the ranks arguing in favour and the leadership against. In the end it came down to a decision between the ‘Socialist Labour Party’ which was quickly dispensed with and the ‘Socialist Party’ which was adopted.

Lastly – a sub-committee of sorts was established (I think one person did all the work) with the task of coming up with a series of names – and it did – it’s preferred option was to merge with the SWP, use the name Socialist Workers Party and adopt all the Militants policies in the new group – it did bring a giggle or two to the fore.

Like

Mark P - October 8, 2012

I think that most of the potential choices have actually been mentioned in the letters above, WbS. As I recall (from reading old bulletins, I wasn’t around at the time), the options people argued for were:

Stay as Militant Labour,
Socialist Left (most of the leadership’s preference)
Socialist Alternative
Socialist Party (which won the vote)
Militant Socialist Party

None of them are particularly inspired, really. It’s not like anyone was suggesting a name like “Youth for Stalin”, “Up Against The Wall Motherfucker” or “Liaison Committee of Militants for a Revolutionary Communist International”, more’s the pity. Socialist Party has the advantage of saying exactly what it is on the tin. It’s a little bland though.

Like

Mark P - October 8, 2012

Thanks for that JRG. I had Socialist Left and Socialist Alternative mixed up – I thought that Socialist Alternative was discarded quickly in favour of Socialist Left rather than the other way around.

As for that last proposal, it would certainly have led to some amusing negotiations: Let’s split the difference. We’ll use your name and our policies! A perfect compromise…

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 8, 2012

I’m really interested in the Socialist Left idea. Was that also a way of avoiding the term ‘party’?

I do agree that in terms of perception including party was probably the best way forward.

There’s at least an article to be written on how Irish left parties chose/inherited/replaced their names.

Like

Mark P - October 8, 2012

Yes, part of the point of Socialist Left and Socialist Alternative as name proposals was precisely to avoid using the word “party”.

There were two overlapping reasons for that: Most importantly a perspective that there would relatively soon be a broader left wing party which Militant Labour would be a part of and calling ML a “party” would lead to confusion. Secondarily, the idea that ML wasn’t really big enough to be considered a real “party” in the sense that term was often used in the Marxist tradition.

The first part seems almost charmingly optimistic 15 years later. The second, well, the meaning of words changes and ML was already a “party” in the sense most Irish people use the word.

Like

WorldbyStorm - October 8, 2012

That makes a lot of sense. One can understand that the argument could potentially have gone both ways at the time and sort of see why it went the party route.

Like

Mark P - October 8, 2012

I’m actually a bit surprised that Enda’s letter was published in Militant complete with the final line calling Spring “a dick”.

Like

Jolly Red Giant - October 8, 2012

Mark – who ever would have considered editing it out would want to have been wearing a rather sturdy helmet.

Like

2. Ireland’s First Political Website? | Broadsheet.ie - October 8, 2012

[…] Some More Old Websites (CederLoungeRevolution) […]

Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: