Is it time to make the SWP and company proscribed organisations?

Plautus

I thought your post, while not directly comparable with the banned comment, seemed to skirt close to saying violence was, on balance, a 'good' thing (TM) because it, as you say, 'shone light on issues'. You can see though, why this might gall a little given that someone has been banned for implying extrajudicial killing by the police force.

The only difference between you and him is one of degrees if you think violence shouldn't be anything other than condemned. And furthermore you should think it a sad day when violence helped to buoy the fees message. It seems difficult to disentangle whether or not you were being descriptive or prescriptive on the issue of violence.

I think that people are always on the radio complaining that no one is protesting full stop, not that the country is awash with protests. There's no need to differentiate this one with a sprinkling of mayhem - everyone then focuses on the mayhem, not the message.

Edit: Whoops, double post

Wolfe Tone

Plautus wrote: »

I thought your post, while not directly comparable with the banned comment, seemed to skirt close to saying violence was, on balance, a 'good' thing (TM) because it, as you say, 'shone light on issues'. You can see though, why this might gall a little given that someone has been banned for implying extrajudicial killing by the police force.

Bloody sunday shed light on the plight of nationalists, I would never say it was a good thing.
The word you are looking for there is murder.

The only difference between you and him is one of degrees if you think violence shouldn't be anything other than condemned. And furthermore you should think it a sad day when violence helped to buoy the fees message.

I have said many times, maybe not in this thread, but in others on the topic, that there is a time and place for violent protest, this is not it.

I think that people are always on the radio complaining that no one is protesting full stop, not that the country is awash with protests. There's no need to differentiate this one with a sprinkling of mayhem - everyone then focuses on the mayhem, not the message.

The point I was making is that the violence and the sit ins, have got much more publicity, negative or otherwise, than just the march would have.

sponsoredwalk

Amhran Nua wrote: »

That depends what those rights might be perceived as. Should the population as a whole suffer for the wages of a minority? I don't think so, in fact that would be the exact opposite of what unions should stand for.


Exactly why I am against anyone wanting to "radicalise" the unions. It means what I said, and we both know it.

How would a population suffer for the wages of a minority because of
activity of unions?

I don't know how actions in Greece constitute a radicalized union,
the bank burnings in Greece and out-and-out revolt in Greece that
went on was not intelligent but that's not a radicalized union either.
That's basically just crazy, if you think that's a radical union I'm
going to have to say this is just propaganda-talk, unions aren't
supposed to operate that way. What I wrote is in the vein of a
radical union, namely fighting to do things for their population,
they aren't as active in Ireland at all as they should be.

Amhran Nua wrote: »

But sure I've been asking for such a condemnation from the start. That it hasn't already been issued doesn't bode well for any future statements, I think you'll have a hard time getting one.

Not to be a smartass but didn't you already say in this thread that
you refused to communicate with them, but you've also been calling
on them for a condemnation? Which is it? What was wrong with
calling on them when I asked?

muffy

southsiderosie wrote: »

I actually agree that a sit-in is what is needed, and said as much in a thread a few weeks ago (well, specifically a sustained mass sit-down surrounding the Dail, meant to provoke a political crisis forcing elections). I also said the ideal people to do it would be students. But they would have to do it both en masse and at the spur of the moment, and most wouldn't take the risk, especially if they had to keep it up for a week or two.

That said, I think a lot of the leftist groups in Ireland deserve the stick they get. I don't understand their political strategy at all unless it is to get as many people as possible to either openly hate them, or think they are an embarrassment.

I believe in this kind of action, which is why I went to Dept of Finance yesterday. The sit in began extremely peacefully. USI will NEVER take any kind of strong action like this, I guess some are setting themselves up for a career in politics, as Mussolini said above, they don't want their reputation with the government damaged. (Welcome to Cronyville) They could do with taking a leaf from the book of one Mr Joe Duffy, he's a bit to militant even for my taste, even been to jail! (Sorry it's a link to a Labour youth page, wikipedia glances over his own involvement, scroll down to the 1980's section)

Scofflaw

The point I was making is that the violence and the sit ins, have got much more publicity, negative or otherwise, than just the march would have.

Except that it won't now be remembered for the 20,000 students protesting about fees, but for the actions of a small number who had nothing to do with that. After a while, mental elision will create a memory that looks like "student protests - violence".

cordially,
Scofflaw

Plautus

The word you are looking for there is murder.

I wasn't diminishing what happened, just using a technical term:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_killing

As you can see, I'm sure you'll agree with it.

Peaceful protest, when well organised, with good speakers can be immensely powerful. Gandhi or King or Hume - not Love Ulster (or rather, those contra Love Ulster) should be a model to bear in mind here. I think you're right, it'll attract more media attention - but only of the negative kind. That's not productive.

sponsoredwalk

Scofflaw wrote: »

Except that it won't now be remembered for the 20,000 students protesting about fees, but for the actions of a small number who had nothing to do with that. After a while, mental elision will create a memory that looks like "student protests - violence".

cordially,
Scofflaw

Exactly, it's getting tiresome. I think people should actively work to
dissuade this from happening again. The only reason that next time
a protest happens the memory from that will be "students stop violent
minority of hijackers from ruining protest - the start of an active position
of the Irish people" is because... well, there is no reason why if we
actively recognise this and try to end it.

You seen in the video's that people were trying to stop others, "Sit down",
if these people would put this into policy in their organizations at least
they'd end the gift they give to the media and FF.

Wolfe Tone

Scofflaw wrote: »

Except that it won't now be remembered for the 20,000 students protesting about fees, but for the actions of a small number who had nothing to do with that. After a while, mental elision will create a memory that looks like "student protests - violence".

cordially,
Scofflaw

I is a good oppertunity though. Take for instance Joe Duffy today.(I couldnt turn the radio off) It started off with a discussion on the violence. It evolved into one on fees.


Just to be clear I dont agree with chucking stuff at Gardai, but I do with the idea of sit ins. I is action like that which will get noticed. A march followed by a speech from wannabe politicians is not gonna achieve anything.

Amhran Nua

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

How would a population suffer for the wages of a minority because of
activity of unions?

Pick a public sector pay thread in Economy and start there.

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

Not to be a smartass but didn't you already say in this thread that
you refused to communicate with them, but you've also been calling
on them for a condemnation? Which is it? What was wrong with
calling on them when I asked?

I was asking you to provide evidence of condemnation. None such exists, nor is ever likely to exist.

I'll wrap it up by saying that as with a lot of the posters in this thread, we probably have a lot in common. The main difference is our perception of reality, I feel that mine is closer to the truth than that of the SWP, and I've plenty of evidence to back that up. I'll reiterate my opposition to both their methods and underlying philosophy, and say again that following in their footsteps is not only dangerous but helping out the agenda of a group that doesn't hold your best interests first and foremost, but rather exists to perpetuate itself.

Wolfe Tone

Plautus wrote: »

I wasn't diminishing what happened, just using a technical term:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extrajudicial_killing

As you can see, I'm sure you'll agree with it.

Extrajudicial killings are the illegal killing of leading political, trade union, dissident, religious, and social figures by either the state government, state authorities like the armed forces and police (as in Liberia under Charles G. Taylor), or criminal outfits such as the Italian Mafia.

I know well what it means, I will stick to the term murder.

Peaceful protest, when well organised, with good speakers can be immensely powerful. Gandhi or King or Hume - not Love Ulster (or rather, those contra Love Ulster) should be a model to bear in mind here. I think you're right, it'll attract more media attention - but only of the negative kind. That's not productive.

Hume is a bad example. Without the backdrop of violence he would have been ignored completely.

Scofflaw

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I is a good oppertunity though. Take for instance Joe Duffy today.(I couldnt turn the radio off) It started off with a discussion on the violence. It evolved into one on fees.


Just to be clear I dont agree with chucking stuff at Gardai, but I do with the idea of sit ins. I is action like that which will get noticed. A march followed by a speech from wannabe politicians is not gonna achieve anything.

And in the absence of the violent protest, would it have been a discussion about the fees, evolving into more discussion about the fees? We'll never know.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Wolfe Tone

Scofflaw wrote: »

And in the absence of the violent protest, would it have been a discussion about the fees, evolving into more discussion about the fees? We'll never know.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I doubt it tbh. Bye elections galore I would say.


Stronger action is needed than just marching.

Scofflaw

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I doubt it tbh. Bye elections galore I would say.

Except that you don't know that - you're saying it because you believe the violence provided more PR.

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Stronger action is needed than just marching.

What's needed is rational action. Even marching would have some value if it was attended by the people the government takes notice of - but you're not going to get those people to come on marches that get hijacked by eirigi and their fellows. They've poisoned the well of protest for everyone else - and for what? For a ruck with the Gardai that achieved nothing.

Nor have eirigi even made direct action more likely - they've managed to taint that too. They're not even useless, they're counter-productive, even for the things that they believe in.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Wolfe Tone

Scofflaw wrote: »

Except that you don't know that - you're saying it because you believe the violence provided more PR.

You dont know that it didnt either! This is getting silly!

What's needed is rational action. Even marching would have some value if it was attended by the people the government takes notice of - but you're not going to get those people to come on marches that get hijacked by eirigi and their fellows. They've poisoned the well of protest for everyone else - and for what? For a ruck with the Gardai that achieved nothing.

Nor have eirigi even made direct action more likely - they've managed to taint that too. They're not even useless, they're counter-productive, even for the things that they believe in.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Who the government takes notice of? So if we get a few bankers, some developers to march that will work?

sponsoredwalk

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Who the government takes notice of? So if we get a few bankers, some developers to march that will work?

Everybody seems to put so much stock in the bankers, the politicians,
the protestors, investors, everyone

They can save us too, just like the government believes they'll save them!!!

Scofflaw

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

You dont know that it didnt either! This is getting silly!

More accurately, it started off that way - but, if you look back, I pointed out that we'll never know, and obviously that applies to both of us. Only one of us has actually offered an opinion on what would have happened, and it wasn't me!

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Who the government takes notice of? So if we get a few bankers, some developers to march that will work?

They don't need to protest to be noticed...the rest of us aren't in that privileged position. But now people won't bother, because: (a) they don't want to protest alongside people like eirigi; and (b) there's no point protesting when people like eirigi will hijack the protest, because the protest can be dismissed out of hand.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Wolfe Tone

Scofflaw wrote: »

More accurately, it started off that way - but, if you look back, I pointed out that we'll never know, and obviously that applies to both of us. Only one of us has actually offered an opinion on what would have happened, and it wasn't me!

Fair enough, Im a bit tired, dong 3 law assignments while also procrastinating away on this does that, some slack please

They don't need to protest to be noticed...the rest of us aren't in that privileged position. But now people won't bother, because: (a) they don't want to protest alongside people like eirigi; and (b) there's no point protesting when people like eirigi will hijack the protest, because the protest can be dismissed out of hand.

Thats silly really, shouldn't let them stop you from protesting. I see eirigi are the baddies now, not SWP! Id rather not protest with either tbh, or the USI, but I wont let them stop me.


Honestly, do you really think that the govt will listen to 40k students who marched?

Whats your opinion on sit ins?

sponsoredwalk

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Id rather not protest with either tbh, or the USI, but I wont let them stop me.

The things people have said in this thread that stop them from going to
protest, I mean I'm starting to think it's any old excuse just not to go.

Scofflaw wrote: »

But now people won't bother, because: (a) they don't want to protest alongside people like eirigi; and (b) there's no point protesting when people like eirigi will hijack the protest, because the protest can be dismissed out of hand.

You don't go to protest to support any party, you go there to tell the
gov you're angry. Things like sit-ins, things like peaceful disruption of
society are the way to send your message. You can't do nothing.

Think of it this way, you went out in the playground even though there
were people there you didn't like, you didn't let them win by not going
out. Well this is similar only the people you don't like will be there at
the protest and the other people you don't like will win if you don't go,
playground psychology

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Fair enough, Im a bit tired, dong 3 law assignments while also procrastinating away on this does that, some slack please

Physics

southsiderosie

muffy wrote: »

I believe in this kind of action, which is why I went to Dept of Finance yesterday. The sit in began extremely peacefully. USI will NEVER take any kind of strong action like this, I guess some are setting themselves up for a career in politics

I agree. A non-violent sit-down protest of even 1/4 of the students who marched would have been in some ways far more effective than simply marching and going home, as the guards do not have the capacity to drag 6,000 people away. However, to engage in that kind of civil disobedience effectively, people (and at a minimum the organizers) really need to be trained and participants need to be willing to get in trouble.

sponsoredwalk wrote: »

How would a population suffer for the wages of a minority because of
activity of unions?

Because unions that are political insiders effectively create a bifurcated labor market, with highly protected workers on one side and extremely vulnerable workers on the other side.

If you look at social partnership, not only did the wages of public sector workers go up dramatically, but the wages at the lower end of the labor market - hotels & restaurants, cleaning services, etc stayed flat and in some sectors declined in real terms. These are also the workers that are the most subject to wage and hour abuses. To me, this represents an utter failure of unions, whose core function should be to protect workers rights. But the only workers Irish unions have shown significant interest in over the last 20 years have been civil servants, in part because they were not ready to play hardball with employers.

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Hume is a bad example. Without the backdrop of violence he would have been ignored completely.

Moderates need radicals, but it helps if the radicals are credible, and most left-wing political radicals in Ireland are not.

FTA69

southsiderosie wrote: »

Yes Sinn Fein is big on solidarity with other groups, Basques and Catalans in particular, but if you think that they or other Republican groups would take kindly to an agenda hijacking during one of their events, there's a bridge in Brooklyn that I'd like to sell you.

If you came to an Éirigi event distributing leaflets about the Cuban Revolution you'd be more than welcome.