Article from the March 2006 issue of the Socialist
newspaper of the Socialist Party, Irish section of the CWI

Marxism V Anarchism

By Cian Prendiville
Over 40 people attended a debate between Socialist Youth (SY) and the anarchist group Workers' Solidarity Movement (WSM). The lively debate had speeches and good discussions on two main points: How to organise to change society? What's the alternative to capitalism?

All present agreed that Irish Ferries and the war in Iraq show how capitalism puts profit before people and so clashes with workers and young people. We also agreed a complete system change is needed, to one where workers and young people run society and people come first. Then the debating began!

The first part of the debate concerned the role of organisations like SY and the WSM. The WSM said our organisations must mirror the society we wish to build i.e. build anarchism within capitalism. SY countered saying that we should strive to be the best tool for change, not necessarily a complete reflection of the new society. The WSM argued against having a leadership, even a democratic leadership. We argued that leadership within an organisation is necessary and inevitable, with some people more willing to give up their time and more capable and that these people should be elected and held accountable by branches with all policies discussed and agreed democratically.

SY pointed to GAMA as a sign of the importance of and possibilities with correct leadership in the wider workers' movement. The WSM, however, criticised us, saying we sought to become the new rulers, not just help transform society. Running in elections was also a hot topic. Both sides agreed that the Dail was not real democracy and that major decisions are taken by multinationals, for instance the invasion of Iraq. Therefore, the WSM argued, we shouldn't run candidates as it is risky and harmful. We argued that having people in the Dail can assist struggles on the ground as was demonstrated in GAMA, and struggles against the water and bin charges.

The second part of the debate was on how an alternative society would work. Both agreed it would centre on democratic workers' councils in workplaces and communities and coming together regionally and nationally. The disagreement was over whether it would be federal or centralised. WSM argued that every individual workplace should be free to do what it wants, even if it goes against the will of the majority. SY argued that that would be ludicrous, especially initially when efficiency is crucial.

We argued that once decisions were made by national, democratically elected and accountable bodies, they would have to be carried out by all. The WSM, however, said all decisions had to be agreed by all on the ground.

Ultimately we strive for a stateless, moneyless society. But we understand that after the working class gain power, the capitalist class both nationally and internationally will do everything it can to hinder the development of socialism. Thus, it will be essential for working class people to organise their own democratic state to ensure the democratic rule of the working class.

All agreed that the debate was a success, with a number of people present indicating they wanted more information about Socialist Youth.