Wednesday, 20 July 2011

The Enough Campaign And The ULA

The 'Enough' campaign's recent #IrishRevolution July16th protest demonstration drew a crowd of between 400 to 1000 people (depending on who you ask) onto the streets of Dublin's city centre. The event didn't quite live up to its billing, but was an energetic and encouraging demonstration nonetheless, by groups opposed to the EU / IMF deal, and other issue specific groups. The Enough campaign was initiated by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) to try to create a broad opposition campaign against the EU / IMF deal, and to demand a referendum on that deal. Whilst this type of initiative is to be welcomed, I believe that its demands do not go far enough. I also believe that future campaigns ought to be initiated, developed and prepared for under the banner of the United Left Alliance (ULA). Unfortunately, the SWP don't agree with this, and prefer to push ahead with their own 'Enough' campaign.

The Enough campaign attempted to be a 'catch-all', cross-class movement to channel the anger that is felt in society over the level of cuts and austerity that we are all experiencing. However, many people (including myself) have asked, why has the campaign not been the product of a combined ULA effort? What I have been informed (I am open to correction if I'm wrong) is that initial discussions were convened by Richard Boyd Barrett to construct a broad campaign and the SWP and People Before Profit (PBP) wanted a movement to be based on proposals such as "jobs, fairness and democracy," "cancel the debt", and a demand for a referendum on the  EU / IMF deal. This, they argued would enable the movement to attract broad layers of society, including right wingers such as David McWilliams or Shane Ross and Stephen Donnelly in the Dail technical group that the ULA in a component of. After the Enough campaign was set up, the Socialist Party was asked to come on board with this campaign but disagreed with limiting the demands to these proposals, and argued that the movement should demand a complete break with the capitalist system and based on working class struggle, which would of course mean less right wing support. This disagreement meant that the SWP went on to create the Enough campaign without the agreement of the ULA.

I believe that the SWP was wrong in taking this approach. If the ULA is to be the force with which young people, workers and the unemployed identify with as this crisis intensifies, then each component part of the ULA should be putting their full weight behind attempts to grow the alliance. Creating campaigns that are not under the banner of the ULA is, I believe, detrimental to this goal. This crisis of capitalism is unprecedented. Each component part of the ULA agrees that we fundamentally require a break with the capitalist system. If that is what we all believe then that is what we must advocate!

During the discussions that decided on the programme that the ULA would have before the recent general election, the Socialist Party argued that the ULA should put forward explicit socialist policies, such as nationalisation, democratic public control of the economy etc etc. The SWP and PBP argued for a less explicit programme that shyed away from these socialist demands. The resulting programme was one of compromise. 

During a discussion I had with a prominent member of the SWP on the day of the Enough demonstration in which I asked him why the campaign was not a ULA one, he informed me that creating a campaign under the ULA banner would dissuade the broader layers of society from taking part in such a demonstration. In my opinion, if one follows this line of argument, what that SWP member was suggesting was that the ULA programme as it stands is 'too left wing' for many, and that the Enough campaign is sufficiently reformist as to attract the broad layers that were hoped for. If this is the line of argument that the SWP is taking towards the ULA, then the question must be asked, how far away from left wing / socialist policies does the SWP want the ULA to go?

The crisis of capitalism that we are experiencing is one that is of epic proportions. It has already led to the growth of huge anti-capitalist movements and sentiments across Greece and Spain. It is inevitable that such movements will emerge here in the coming period. For the ULA to based itself on weak reformist demands would be to fundamentally misjudge the the nature of this crisis and the consciousness that will develop as it continues.

If the ULA is explicit in calling for a break from capitalism, is explicit in calling for a democratic socialist society and is explicit in what it stands for, then the movements that will emerge will gravitate towards the ULA. To water down the ULA's policies towards what the Enough campaign advocated, in an attempt to attract a broader layer now, would in my opinion be a grave underestimation of what lies ahead and of the class consciousness that will develop from it.
Be Moderate? We Only Want The Earth

1 comment:

  1. Nice one Derek. Yeah the comments made bby some at the ULA forum betray this attitude of "if we're too left-wing we'll scare people off"... while the concrete experience of new left formations across Europe is that at crucial times they were not left-wing enough-- they were, to radicalized new activists, just another political party.

    The ULA cannot afford to be just another political party.