Upcoming Events

National | Miscellaneous

no events match your query!

New Events

National

no events posted in last week

Blog Feeds

Anti-Empire

Anti-Empire

offsite link Ukraine Buys Huge Amounts of Russian Fue... Fri Jan 20, 2023 08:34 | Antonia Kotseva

offsite link Turkey Has Sent Ukraine Cluster Munition... Thu Jan 12, 2023 00:26 | Jack Detsch

offsite link New Israeli Government Promises to Talk ... Tue Jan 10, 2023 21:13 | Al Majadeen

offsite link Russia Training Iranian Pilots Ahead of ... Tue Jan 10, 2023 15:19 | The Times of Israel

offsite link Lukashenko Abolishes Copyright Protectio... Tue Jan 10, 2023 15:05 | Nikki Main

Anti-Empire >>

The Saker
A bird's eye view of the vineyard

offsite link What Becomes of NATO After The Loss In Ukraine (Gonzalo Lira) Fri Feb 03, 2023 23:15 | The Saker

offsite link NATO warns that Putin?s MASSIVE attack is happening now, send weapons | Redacted with Clayton Morris Fri Feb 03, 2023 22:47 | The Saker

offsite link OH SH*T, HERE WE GO (Douglas Macgregor) Fri Feb 03, 2023 22:12 | The Saker

offsite link When Numbers Lie Fri Feb 03, 2023 21:41 | The Saker
Please visit Andrei?s website: https://smoothiex12.blogspo... and support him here: https://www.patreon.com/beP...

offsite link Various important updates about the blog shutdown Fri Feb 03, 2023 16:59 | The Saker
Dear friends I want to share a few updates about the blog shutdown with you: Archiving the blog I have been contacted by several people offering to host an archive

The Saker >>

Lockdown Skeptics

The Daily Sceptic

offsite link 80,000 Students Take Their Universities to Court For Refunds on Degrees Disrupted by Lockdown Sat Feb 04, 2023 09:00 | Will Jones
Almost 80,000 students are taking legal action and demanding refunds over the costly courses disrupted by Covid that left many without the skills they need for the fields they wish to work in.
The post 80,000 Students Take Their Universities to Court For Refunds on Degrees Disrupted by Lockdown appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

offsite link The Fightback Against the Woke Capture of Scottish Schools Begins Sat Feb 04, 2023 07:00 | Stuart Waiton
Stuart Waiton writes for the Daily Sceptic about his new group, the Scottish Union for Education, which aims to push back against the political indoctrination of Scottish schoolchildren.
The post The Fightback Against the Woke Capture of Scottish Schools Begins appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

offsite link News Round-Up Sat Feb 04, 2023 00:34 | Will Jones
A summary of the most interesting stories in the past 24 hours that challenge the prevailing orthodoxy about the virus and the vaccines, the ?climate emergency? and the supposed moral defects of Western civilisation.
The post News Round-Up appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

offsite link 94% of Claims to the Government?s Vaccine Injury Payment Scheme Are Rejected, Many Because They Are ... Fri Feb 03, 2023 17:02 | Claire Hibbs
94% of claims to the Government's vaccine injury payment scheme are rejected, many because they are not "60% disabled". Mark Kerry, whose pre-vaccine life is gone forever, is one of them ? read his story.
The post 94% of Claims to the Government’s Vaccine Injury Payment Scheme Are Rejected, Many Because They Are Not “60% Disabled”. Mark Kerry is One of Them appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

offsite link Vitamin D Cuts COVID-19 Risk of Death in Half, New Study Finds. So Why Isn?t it Recommended? Fri Feb 03, 2023 13:00 | Will Jones
Vitamin D cuts the risk of death from COVID-19 by 51% and the risk of ICU admission by 72%, a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials has found. But it's still not recommended for use in the U.K. Why not?
The post Vitamin D Cuts COVID-19 Risk of Death in Half, New Study Finds. So Why Isn’t it Recommended? appeared first on The Daily Sceptic.

Lockdown Skeptics >>

Voltaire Network
Voltaire, international edition

offsite link Voltaire International Newsletter N°26 Sat Feb 04, 2023 05:43 | en

offsite link EU mulls ways to censor Russian views Thu Feb 02, 2023 04:34 | en

offsite link Zelensky's sponsor and Hunter Biden fall from grace Wed Feb 01, 2023 03:30 | en

offsite link Two perceptions of the war in Ukraine, by Thierry Meyssan Tue Jan 31, 2023 07:03 | en

offsite link Pfizer modified Covid virus ahead of pandemic Mon Jan 30, 2023 13:28 | en

Voltaire Network >>

SOCIALIST PARTY'S ELECTED COUNCILLOR'S OPPORTUNISM

category national | miscellaneous | news report author Saturday July 20, 2002 23:44author by Bill Preston Report this post to the editors

Socialist Councillor voted against abortion and for police special powers.

--------- forwarded message -----------


SHOULD A SOCIALIST ELECTED OFFICIAL CAMPAIGN AGAINST ABORTION
AND FOR GIVING THE COPS SPECIAL POWERS?
By Sean McPherson

Johnny McLaughlin is an elected City Council member in Omagh,
Northern Ireland. He ran for re-election two years ago as a
Socialist Party candidate. The Socialist Party of Northern
Ireland is affiliated to the Committee for a Workers
International (CWI).

Johnny McLaughlin, as a council member voted in favour of anti
abortion legislation. Later, he spoke to the bourgeois media
and compared abortion to the “killing fields” and expressed
political positions on the issue very similar to those of the
right wing fundamentalists in the US.

Johnny McLaughlin also voted as a council member to grant
special powers to the local police to apprehend without
sufficient evidence a group of alleged nationalist terrorists
who bombed a market in his town of Omagh. While the terrorist
attack was despicable, the vote of a socialist councillor to
extend special powers to the police that could then be used
against any legitimate and non-terrorist group is unthinkable.

The Socialist Party of Northern Ireland and the leadership of
the CWI (co-thinkers of Socialist Alternative in the US) covered
up the actions of Johnny McLaughlin and never published any
public document or article distancing itself from the positions
of THEIR only elected official. They rather tried to negotiate
with him to maintain silence about certain positions.

Eventually, Johnny McLaughlin left the Socialist Party. But
even after he left the organization, the SP remained silent.

Here is a letter written by the main leader of the SP in
Northern Ireland, Petter Hadden, explaining the opportunist line
the SP took to try to hide these events.

The notes and footnotes in the letter were added by us to
clarify certain events and names mentioned in the letter. The
purpose of this material is, once again, to raise the issue that
the socialist left will be rebuilt only through principled
stands and public debates of both its great ideas and its
failures. We cannot, and should not, operate in the same way
than the ruling class parties, hiding the truth or granting
privileges to our elected officials.

LETTER FROM PETER HADDEN (Annotated) (1)

“It is true that when an anti abortion motion was presented to
Omagh Council Johnny McLaughlin - along with all the other
councillors - supported it.

“The Socialist Party leadership in Northern Ireland were made
aware of and discussed this in November, not long before the IEC

(2). The issue was also discussed at a National Executive
Committee meeting and it was agreed to organise a discussion
with Johnny to register the Party position on abortion and to
try to reach an agreement on how he, as a public representative,
should deal with the issue if it comes up again.

“The discussion was held with Johnny before Christmas. This was
the first time anyone had outlined to him the position of the
party on abortion. Johnny remains opposed to abortion and as an
individual member of the party he has every right to hold this
opinion and to argue for it within the party structures.

“When the point was made that as a public representative he had
a responsibility to represent the party views rather than his
own he accepted this. Asked what he would have done had he been
aware of the party's position on abortion he stated that he
would have put the position or perhaps abstained. (3)

“Our general position is that public representative should at
all times put the party position. But as with every general
approach how it is applied will depend on the particular
circumstance

“Abortion, while an important issue, is not a make or break
question for our party.

“To say this in no way implies a softening of our attitude. We
firmly support a women's right to choose, and link this with
demands for adequate information, advice on contraception,
family planning and for adequate support for single parents
including childcare, play school and nursery facilities without
which single women, especially young women do not have the right
to choose, in this case to make the choice not to have an
abortion.

“In the north, despite a probable shift of attitudes among young
people and in the larger urban centres, it remains a fact that
among the working class, protestant and catholic, there is still
strong opposition.

“We have never insisted on support for a pro-choice position as
a condition of membership of our party. It is not something that
would normally be raised in discussions with prospective
members; someone could be in the party for quite some time
before the issue would come up; and it has never been included
in the What We Stand For column in the paper. We have had and
still have comrades who are extremely active and play a key role
in building the party who remain opposed to abortion… (4)

“… [S]ome time ago a motion was moved by the DUP (5) on Omagh
Council asking that the police be given the powers they need to
allow them to arrest the Omagh bombers. The argument was that
the police knew the identity of the bombers but could not amass
the evidence to convict them.

“Our position would of course be to oppose this measure. Special
powers of this character, although brought in for a single
purpose, tend to be used more widely and are a threat to the
labour movement in the longer run.

“However this position, while correct, would have been difficult
to argue in a small town still traumatised by the after effects
of the single worst atrocity of the troubles and with the
families of the bereaved demanding that the bombers be brought
to “justice”. (6)

“An indication of the mood in the town and the pressure on the
councillors is the fact that the motion was not only passed, but
that even Sinn Fein (7) did not oppose it, rather they
abstained.

“Johnny voted for the motion but in his speech warned that there
should be no miscarriages of justice, no Birmingham 6s, as a
result of new police powers. We think he should have made these
points, and made clear his opposition to the bombers but then
voted against the motion. Had he done so he would have been
severely criticised, his views would have been caricatured as
being soft on the bombers. While it was incorrect, it is not
hard to understand why he voted the way he did. It is easy from
the distance of Glasgow or Dundee to be “shocked” that a
Socialist Party councillor should “support repressive
legislation”. The matter is not so straightforward in a small
town still reverberating from the carnage perpetrated on its
main street. (8)

“Following this vote members of the EC discussed with Johnny and
he accepted that he should have opposed the motion.
Unfortunately by the time this discussion had taken place a
letter had already appeared in the local press from the comrade
opposed to Johnny’s membership effectively distancing the party
from his vote. (9)This had been done without reference to Johnny
or the EC who would have been completely opposed to publicly
advertising a division in the party in this way. (10)

“These points have been made the subject of controversy by a few
comrades in Ireland for almost three years. A debate of sorts
has taken place but, until now not an adequate debate in the
open forums of the party. (11) Now the issue has been spread to
Scotland and will no doubt be spread beyond.

“It is for this reason, and because the present intolerable
situation in Omagh cannot be allowed to continue, that our EC
has decided to deal with the issues in some detail in this
statement. We hope that this will result in an open debate which
will bring the matter to a resolution.” (12)

FOOTNOTES:

(1) Peter Hadden is the main leader of the SP of Northern Ireland, a member of the IEC – International Executive Committee – of the CWI.

(2) Refers to the IEC of the CWI. The issue however was
NEVER discussed by the IEC which was never informed of the
problems in Northern Ireland.
(3) As an elected official, in a country such as Northern
Ireland where abortion is a big issue, he was not aware of the
party’s position on the issue?
(4) In the last four years was an increasingly strong pro
abortion movement that obtained in the last year a terrific
victory by approving a pro-abortion referendum for the first
time in Ireland’s history. Minimizing the issue of abortion is
clearly misleading by any so-called socialist. Stating that
support for abortion is not a requirement for membership in a
socialist organization is unthinkable for socialists.
(5) DUP = right wing party in Northern Ireland.
(6) In other words, socialists in the US should have
supported the Patriot Act?
(7) Sinn Fein, the legal party linked to the IRA in
Ireland. They abstained, bad enough, but certainly not as bad
as voting for it.
(8) Here the letter refers to “Glasgow” and “Dundee”, cities
in Scotland, because were Scottish socialists the first to
criticize the Irish socialists for the vote of its elected
official.
(9) Here, they refer to a rank and file member of the party
that wrote a letter to the media criticizing the elected
official for his positions. This member was attacked and
ostracized in the party after his actions, which were correct in
our view.
(10) In other words: they preferred the unity of the party
above the principles of the party. But this did not work as the
elected official continued his shift to the right and abandoned
the party anyway. The SP was left without its principles and
without its elected official.
(11) Here they admitted that no democratic discussion took
place in the organization.
(12) Such a debate never took place.

author by D O hEochai - SPpublication date Sun Jul 21, 2002 12:14author address author phone Report this post to the editors

This happened years ago and really is old hat. The footnotes were added by opponents of the CWI in Scotland and are inaccurate.

author by sp rank and filepublication date Sun Jul 21, 2002 18:47author address author phone Report this post to the editors

The rank and file wouldn't have him. He never attended a party conference and never took part in the party. The leadership wanted to recruit and consolidate him. But luckily within the sp the rank and file have alot of power. AS soon as his positions became known he was finished.

author by rafpublication date Sun Jul 21, 2002 18:53author address author phone Report this post to the editors

funnily enough the people in the US who wrote this were silent on the matter for at least two years themselves. When the debate happened over JM they didn't take part at all or say a word. Now they are, opportunistic.

author by Andrewpublication date Mon Jul 22, 2002 11:40author address author phone Report this post to the editors

I think this case highlights the problems of electoralism in two wars

1. The CWI were so desperate to hang onto their only elected counciller in the north that they were willing to look the other way on some fairly fundamental issues. This illustrates they way within any political party elected official come to accumulate power over other members either formally or as in this case informally.

2. More generally we see again the problem of 0 accountability where someone is elected on one set of policies (presumably the CWI platform) and can then turn around and vote for contradictory polocies without any chance of recall. (Of course next time out you can vote for someone elese instead - but by then the damage is done)

ps my understanding is that he left the organisation, not that he was expelled as some of the other replies seem to imply

Related Link: http://struggle.ws/election.html
author by Seytonpublication date Mon Jul 22, 2002 16:32author address author phone Report this post to the editors

Johnny McLaughlin is no longer in the Socialist Party. He left because of the differences he had. This posting was put up be opponants of the CWI in the USA, probably the like of Carlos Petroni!.

Andrew- Jonny McLaughlin was accountable to the CWI platform. He was held to account. Unfortunatly there is no re-call for elected officials under capitalism and he did not have to go before the electorate again.

author by fuinseogpublication date Mon Jul 22, 2002 17:12author address author phone Report this post to the editors

I'm not hear to defend the socialist party, but this kind of stuff is nonsense: "political positions on the issue very similar to those of the right wing fundamentalists in the US"

Right, and opposition to US imperialism is a position very similar to those of Islamic fundamentalists? Opposition to Israeli war crimes is a position very similar to those of neo-Nazis?

author by Finghinpublication date Mon Jul 22, 2002 17:58author address author phone Report this post to the editors

The Socialist Party has no councillors in the North. Johnny McLoughlin has left the party 2 or 3 years ago. He ran in the last elections as an independent and he is now an independent councillor.

author by redpublication date Mon Jul 22, 2002 23:53author address author phone Report this post to the editors

There is no doubht that there are dangers in elections and the tactic of going for them. To deny that would be to deny history. Look at the WP for example. But you are mistaken on the Johnnny McLoughlin case. He did not stand for counciller on the cwi platform. He was an independent counciller before we came into contact with him. He as far as I know stood as independent labour. We met him through the labour coalition in NI formed for the talks. We recruited him as a counciller but failed to consolidate him. But thats life, I don't think it was wrong to try. We could be as much at fault as anyone else in the matter for failing to convince him on issues such as pro choice.
Johnny is a very good community worker and we will have to convince many more like him if we are serious about winning a majority to the ideas of socialism. If we simply write off every community worker because they aren't a rounded out marxist or anarchist and haven't read marx and bakunin and the rest we will never emerge from our present cul de sack. And if we expect to do this without some failures along the way we are simply utopian and should quit now. We make no apologies for our failures.

author by Andrewpublication date Tue Jul 23, 2002 14:09author address author phone Report this post to the editors

I don't remember proposing that we should "write off every community worker because they aren't a rounded out marxist or anarchist". We are talking here of an elected SP councillor who supported anti-abortion motions in a council vote not somebodies individual opinion. The CWI letter posted above seems to be able to understand the distinction between these even if you won't.

Anyway I'm still unclear if he left the CWI (which is what I understand) or if he was expelled (as was claimed by an SP member at the start of the thread and is also implied by the claim that he was held accountable by the CWI). I agree all this is a bit historical but I'd still like to know which of these two it was.

author by Finghin - Socialist Youthpublication date Tue Jul 23, 2002 17:03author address author phone Report this post to the editors

To my knowledge he left the CWI

Related Link: http://www.syucd.cjb.net
author by redpublication date Wed Jul 24, 2002 20:40author address author phone Report this post to the editors

He left, but if he hadn't left he would have been pushed. Its difficult to see the complaint here. After he voted this way he was brought up on it and before long he left the party. It was too wide a gap. I don't see how a committed pro lifer could be in a party like ours anyway. If JM was still in the party or remained in the party after his actions I could understand the problem but he didn't.
You are aginst councillers full stop anyway or useing the councils as a platform which is a different argument.
A risk was taken which didn't work out. But if we aren't prepared to take risks we won't get very far.

Number of comments per page
  
 
© 2001-2023 Independent Media Centre Ireland. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by Independent Media Centre Ireland. Disclaimer | Privacy