A forerunner of the ULA: The Left Alliance

[antiestablishmentarian]

The ULA is often discussed, correctly, by comparison to contemporary new-left formations on the continent like the NPA. However, people seem to overlook the history of another formation or attempt at a left-alliance which was the 'Left Alternative' group set up in Dublin in the seventies. It was comprised of Sinn Féin (the forerunners of the Workers Party not the Provos), Labour's 'Liaison of the Left' and the Communist Party. Information on the group is sketchy, and what I know of it comes from a brief account in Hanley & Millars' 'The Lost Revolution'. Seemingly, a programme was drawn up and attempts made to unite on shared issues. 1,000 turned up to its launch in the Mansion House and work on opposing the FG/Lab governments assault on civil liberties led to the foundation of the Irish Council for Civil Liberties which is still in existence today. Does anyone have any information on this group or know where I could find material on them (there's nothing on Google), because there are parallels here with the ULA and it would be interesting to tease them out.

[Sam Lord]

First i have ever heard of it I have to say.

[Griska]

It was way before my time, but I do remember it being talked about as a failure.

I know it didn't last very long.

[antiestablishmentarian]

From the limited section on it in 'The Lost Revolution', it seems the group was split along sectional lines and this exacerbated differences. It seems SF were referred to by the CP as 'petty-bourgeois', and the SF didn't take this description too kindly at a time when the organisation was beginning to call itself Sinn Féin the Workers Party.

[Griska]

This is all I could find.
It only lasted a year

Left Alliance – an alliance between the Communist Party of Ireland, Sinn Féin (Official), and the Liason Committee of the Labour Left. Formed in 1975, it produced two economic manifestos and operated quietly in various areas but collapsed in 1976 because the participants had other priorities.

This is a handy little glossary, actually:

http://irishlabour.com/?p=144

[antiestablishmentarian]

Cheers Griska. I think it is important to study something like this because the left has always had unity as one of it's key aims but has never succeeded in uniting different groups for long save where one is taken over by another. This is what makes the ULA project so interesting, because of the genuine differences that exist and the fact that they're being beaten into co-operating in some way by the gravity of the crisis (although the SP has had the demand for a new mass workers party as a key aim for a long time in it's programme).

[Griska]

It is indeed interesting.
Do you really believe that they are willing to bend to a consensus though, or do you think, as I do that they're bound to get shirty if their respective objectives aren't met.

[antiestablishmentarian]

It is indeed interesting.
Do you really believe that they are willing to bend to a consensus though, or do you think, as I do that they're bound to get shirty if their respective objectives aren't met.

To be honest, I think it'll be little more than a pool of the three groups and some non-aligned activists who will either be recruited by the constituents or drift away. The focus on water charges, which while important is still a peripheral enough concern given the severe and pressing problem of unemployment and lack of a coherent policy on how to deal with the debt crisis in the event of repudiation, is evidence of their inability to sit down and thrash out a good, coherent and resaonably detailed programme which would allow an independent organisation to found itself and grow separately.

[Griska]

I totally agree. I believe that it was a worthwhile endeavour, but don't believe they'll allow their agenda to be diverted from.
Water charges, imo, are merely a recruiting tool.

[Apjp]

In short vote the left by all means but dont expect a revolutionary enlightening alternative. Good job those of us who want to be journos and econs seek to work abroad anyways. Id hate to be one of the many who was hoping for a job here.

[Sam Lord]

Off topic ... but I did find this report of a meeting between the CPI and the ULA which might be of interest to some:

A meeting took place in March between representatives of the Communist Party of Ireland and the United Left Alliance. It was organised at the request of Mick O’Reilly (of Unite and the Dublin Trades Council), who attended the meeting. The CPI was represented by Eugene McCartan and Tom Redmond and the ULA by Eddie Conlon of People Before Profit and Kevin McLoughlin of the Socialist Party.

The CPI welcomed the electoral formation of the ULA and congratulated them on their success with the election of five TDs. The CPI has always been in favour of united working-class action and of promoting unity. It instanced the meetings in November and December on a trades council initiative to bring the left together, when the CPI was the only party to have attended all three meetings. While not contesting the elections, it had urged support for voting left, which included the ULA, Sinn Féin, and progressive individuals.

It had also initiated a campaign demanding repudiation of the so-called sovereign debt and urging support for a referendum on the issue. The campaign was now a public one, and individuals and organisation were being asked to promote it.

The ULA explained that their coming together was to promote an anti-capitalist front with a credible alternative voting programme. They were pleased with the results and envisaged campaigns both inside and outside the Dáil against the coalition’s austerity measures. The aim was to build a working-class party comprising initially the existing groups and the individuals who helped the election teams around the country.

They realised it would take time to discuss and agree both a political programme and a structure to satisfy the diverse components.

The CPI stressed that its concept of the left was wider than that of the ULA, as it entailed an anti-imperialist content, for example in relation to the European Union, and a political attitude to forces such as Sinn Féin. The ULA accepted that there were di_erences between approaches: for example, they did not consider the Labour Party or Sinn Féin part of the left.

The exchange of views was friendly, fraternal, and useful, the CPI stating that there were no enemies on the left, only rivals.

The ULA stated that when a programme and ideas of structures were more advanced they would present any position papers to the CPI.

The ULA explained that their coming together was to promote an anti-capitalist front with a credible alternative voting programme. lol.

[antiestablishmentarian]

Yes I read that a few months ago too, thought it was interesting to say the least.

Griska, I'd have to say you're on the ball with that analysis. The SP sees water charges as a way to grow itself based on their history (Joe's election in 1997 off the back of the successful campaign which defeated them), and also on the fact that more contacts come up to the stall, buy papers or sign petitions when the issue is water charges than for comparable stalls. It's something that most people will oppose enough to give passive support for a group which actively opposes them.

[Griska]

The exchange of views was friendly, fraternal, and useful, the CPI stating that there were no enemies on the left, only rivals.

[Jolly Red Giant]

Griska, I'd have to say you're on the ball with that analysis. The SP sees water charges as a way to grow itself based on their history (Joe's election in 1997 off the back of the successful campaign which defeated them), and also on the fact that more contacts come up to the stall, buy papers or sign petitions when the issue is water charges than for comparable stalls. It's something that most people will oppose enough to give passive support for a group which actively opposes them.

With all due respect anti- I am surprised to read this from you. Given your past association with the Socialist Party I would have expected a far better understanding of the nature and purpose of oppositon to the water charges.

The previous campaign against the water charges (and it dated back to 1984 when they were first introduced) was not designed as a 'recrutiment' tactic or an effort to generate passive support for the campaign. Water charges were defeated by building a mass active opposition to the charges through a mass campaign of non-payment coupled with public meetings, protests and activities that involved thousands of people. The anti-water charges campaign in Dublin had over 20,000 paid up members.

The current attempt to introduce water charges is a direct attact on the living standards of working class people and will be resisted whether the Socialist Party get involved or not. The Socialist Party will be involved, will play an active role and will use the experience of the previous campaigns to build as big a mass movement of opposition as possible in order to defeat the dictats of the government and its backers. I am sure some people will join the Socialist Party as a result of the campaign. I suspect more will join the ULA. However, the priority is to defeat the charges - which if successful could lay the basis for further and more extensive opposition to the austerity programme of the right.

[C. Flower]

To be honest, I think it'll be little more than a pool of the three groups and some non-aligned activists who will either be recruited by the constituents or drift away. The focus on water charges, which while important is still a peripheral enough concern given the severe and pressing problem of unemployment and lack of a coherent policy on how to deal with the debt crisis in the event of repudiation, is evidence of their inability to sit down and thrash out a good, coherent and resaonably detailed programme which would allow an independent organisation to found itself and grow separately.

I agree that the "water charges" focus is fetishistic and I think also opportunist. Things have moved on by light years and not in a good way since the last water charges campaign. The water issue now is privatisation/the IMF deal.