Whoever you voted for
The Government won!
From an entertainment point of view, the 1997 general election in
the 26-counties provided quite a few moments to savour - the look on
Fianna Fáil TD Brian Lenihan's face as Joe Higgins of the
Socialist Party had the cheek to be elected before him in Dublin
West; the sight of not one but three outgoing Labour Party Ministers
and Ministers of State attempting to put a brave face on the ebbing
of the Spring Tide and its carrying away of their seats; the haunted
look on the face of the most openly Thatcherite candidate, the PD's
Michael McDowell as he attempted to cling on to some hope during the
long count in Dublin South East; the attempt by the returning officer
in Dublin North to keep a straight face as he announced the number of
votes cast for the Christian Solidarity Party - 666.
From an overall political point of view, the election provided
little to smile about. Some of the bums occupying the seats in
Dáil Eireann may have changed, but throughout the campaign it
was obvious that no matter who won, the policies would remain the
same. Nevertheless the election results did provide some indication
that significant numbers of people are looking for radical change.
Anarchists have absolutely no interest in choosing who is going to
rule over us - we want to change entirely the system which divides us
into rulers and ruled. Furthermore we believe that it is impossible
to bring about the end of the capitalist system through parliament
and that participation in parliamentary elections merely serves to
continue the illusion among working class people that real change can
be effected in this way. Nonetheless, we obviously recognise that
many of those who voted for the candidates of the Socialist Party and
the Socialist Workers Party were people who were looking for radical
alternatives to the present system of choosing between Tweedledum and
Tweedledumber.
And the number of votes cast for such candidates was indeed
significant. In fact the combined first preference votes of these two
parties in the eight constituencies which they contested was a
massive 14,447. This was actually 37% of the 39,142 votes cast for
the Labour Party candidates (who included eight outgoing TDs - three
of whom were Ministers or Ministers of State) in these
constituencies. In addition Seamus Healy of the Clonmel Workers and
Unemployed Group polled 5,814 votes in Tipperary South. By way of a
further contrast, the Socialist Party alone won 53% of the vote
gained by Democratic Left in Dublin (who had four outgoing TDs among
their candidates - 3 of whom were members of the last government).
These results are obviously significant. Given the impediments
which left-wing candidates inevitably face (lack of media exposure,
garda harassment - as in the arrest of SWP candidate Peadar O' Grady
under the Public Order Act - etc.) and taken together with the 43%
vote gained by Socialist Workers Party member Carol-Ann Duggan in the
presidential election in the State' s largest and most bureaucratic
union - SIPTU - they prove, as stated above, that huge numbers of
people are seeking radical change in our society. The question which
must be answered is how that change can be brought about.
Anarchists do not participate in or support candidates in
parliamentary elections. This does not mean however that we take only
a passive interest in elections. In fact we used the election period
to organise a successful public meeting in Dublin on the theme 'Why
do rich crooks run the country? - Hear about the anarchist
alternative to parliament.' In addition we produced and distributed
several thousand leaflets for the fictional candidate,
Mr.
Crook (See Workers Solidarity no. 51).
People often say to us that if we really want to change things we
should run in elections, we should put our ideas before the people.
But let's look at what happens when supposedly radical/revolutionary
groups/parties do get involved in electioneering. It inevitably leads
to revolutionaries forsaking their revolutionary principles - or at
least keeping them hidden.
The words 'socialism' and 'revolution' tend to disappear from the
election manifestos/programmes. Getting the candidate elected becomes
more important than educating the electorate about the meaning of
socialism. The Socialist Party posters in General Election '97, for
example, consisted of nothing more than a large picture of the
candidate and a small caption saying Socialist Party. Nevertheless
nobody can deny that the election results did provide some indication
that significant numbers of people were looking for radical change.
What type of society?
The real question, however, when it comes to discussing elections
is what type of society are we trying to bring about. Leninist
parties often talk about 'Socialism from Below', but in fact their
policies and programmes run directly counter to such a concept. This
is why they can participate in parliamentary elections and still
insist that they will not sell out. Whether it is in the unions or in
community-based campaigns, they see themselves as 'leaders' of the
working class.
Thus in the unions they put forward strategies such as the
building of Broad Lefts - strategies which for the greater part
ignore completely the crucial task of challenging and smashing the
undemocratic structures in the unions which lead to overpaid
bureaucrats being able to take all power to themselves. In a
nutshell, the Leninists' strategy could be summed up as depending on
better, more radical or real socialists to take over and run the
union in the members' interests. The concept of genuine rank-and-file
groupings taking control themselves is not part of the equation.
In community campaigns a similar trend is to be seen. True, the
Socialist Party were very heavily involved in - indeed were the prime
movers behind - the hugely successful struggle against water charges
in Dublin. But what was done with the victory? In short, a successful
campaign which involved huge numbers of people was diverted down the
electoral cul-de-sac. While the Socialist Party campaigned during the
election under the banner 'People Power in action', the message that
was ultimately being given to people was that the success of that
people power could only be counted in terms of the number of first
preference votes it delivered.
This may not even have been intentional, but it is an inevitable
consequence. After Joe Higgins' near success in the 1996 Dublin West
bye-election, sights were immediately set on the 1997 general
election. The votes in that election were hardly counted until people
were looking forward to the local elections due to be held in 1998
and weighing up the possibilities of winning council seats.
Changing the Rulers?
A more honest message to have tried to give to people is that real
socialism and democracy cannot be brought about in this way, that
true people power involves working class people in taking initiatives
for themselves, in retaining the sort of power which brought about
the end of the water charges at personal, local and community level
and organising at that level to bring about change. National (and
international) organisation is vital, but should be federal so that
decision making making powers remain with all those involved.
It is a much more difficult message. But it is the only honest
one. Unless that is you're just talking about changing one set of
rulers for another. We're not.
Gregor Kerr
