nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Another split - Paul Murphy leaves the Socialist Party

JohnnyFlash

News reaches us that Paul Murphy and a number of other senior members have left the Socialist Party to start a new group. Yet another split. This follows ‘extensive debate’ at a meeting last weekend.

https://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2019/0926/1078425-politics/

Any ideas on what caused the split? A falling out based on some obscure interpretation of Marxist philosophy? Suspicious because of his bourgeois background? A message from the real leadership over in London?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Apiarist

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

...Can you imagine them trying to put a budget together, or trying to take the really serious decisions on health projects? They'd be useless....

Useless? No. If you said worse than useless, I could agree.

First of all, if you see hard left (or hard right, or any other hard *ism) gaining majority in the Dáil, its time to run for the hills, because it means that the country is in such a bad state that people vote for a revolution.

Secondly, if hard left do gain majority, they can put together a budget. A compromise is difficult to achieve, while if you do not need to compromise, you can put a budget together easily. Healthcare? Look at Cuba and make all healthcare state controlled, abolish private insurance companies and make consultants to be state employees. Easy!

padd b1975

victor8600 wrote: »

Like a capitalism where failing banks are allowed to go bust and corrupt bankers go to jail? And don't tell me that we had to bail them out to save pension funds and personal savings -- we could guarantee those for a fraction of the cost.

We had to try and restore our credit rating on the international markets, and in the current Brexit climate I'm glad we took that course of action.

petronius

I think all the TDs who are or were Socialist Party members have migrated about the entities on the left, due to egos and little differences

Clare Daly LP, SP, UL now I4C
Joan Collins LP, SP, PBPA, UL now I4C
Mick Barry LP, SP,AAA,SolidarityPBP
Ruth Coppinger, SP,AAA,SolidarityPBP
Paul Murphy SP/AAA/SolidarityPBP now I

although multiple party entities is not unusual on the left.
Brid Smith (SF?) LP SWP PBPA
Catherine Murphy I, WP, DL, LP, I, SD

Yer Da sells Avon

petronius wrote: »

To paraphrase Tony Benn, "The problem is there is too many socialist parties and not enough socialists!"

So Paul Murphy who was in a party(SP) which is in an alliance(AAA/Solidarity) which is also in an alliance(Solidarity-PBP) with another alliance (PBP mostly SWP), is leaving to form another party/movement which will still be in one of these alliances.:)

This latest movement will be the one though. I think they sincerely believe that. Anyway, I'm sure it'll all be explained in a public meeting of eight people in a room in Wynn's Hotel or somewhere. That's how these things usually work anyway.

Murphy and his ilk lack the self-awareness to look across at what Jeremy Corbyn has achieved by working away quietly, holding his nose for thirty years in a party riddled with terrible people, compromising and accepting that it's not all about him.

splinter65

facehugger99 wrote: »

The bold Paul is very much one of the 'spend other people's money' brand of socialists.

He’d be one of the socialists elected to “organize” the other socialists.

Idbatterim

what is the aims of this socialist group, including murphy? they have never been in power and they already have probably the worlds most generous welfare state, paid by idiot workers, including the working poor hit by a marginal rate of FIFTY percent of their income over the pittance of E35,000!

James Brown

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

Much as I dislike the little bollix I'm not surprised that one of the reasons he jumped ship was because he wasn't getting along with Coppinger.

He was a one trick pony anyway, once the dutch gold and 20 benson crowd got out of paying for water usage he had nothing else to talk about.

You mean the people who didn't have to pay anyway, thanks to FG/Lab put effort into protesting?

Ruraldweller56 wrote: »

BuT tHe BaNk bAiLoUt CoMrAdE!!!!

Bailing out banks was very communist.

christy c wrote: »

Haha, you're deflecting like hell when someone other than FG or FF is mentioned yet I'm the team supporter.

To recap; the op is about Murphy leaving a group. Then folk start talking about how all those parties are terrible and I countered with what actual parties with actual power had accomplished. It's not my fault you're protective of them Christy. What am I deflecting away from by the way? Having a counter comment is deflection is it? Deflection would be if I start talking about Horse racing. And why would I be deflecting? I know little to nothing about Murphy outside of three Garda giving false evidence about him.
IMO, FF/FG voters con themselves into continually voting in those shams and it's okay because...others...something.

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't know.

Clare and Mick gave them a run for their money before departing to greater nosebags in Europe.

Look Christy, Blanch is deflecting! He'll be on about Gerry's peado brother before long...

christy c

Matt Barrett wrote: »

To recap; the op is about Murphy leaving a group. Then folk start talking about how all those parties are terrible and I countered with what actual parties with actual power had accomplished. It's not my fault you're protective of them Christy. What am I deflecting away from by the way? Having a counter comment is deflection is it? Deflection would be if I start talking about Horse racing. And why would I be deflecting? I know little to nothing about Murphy outside of three Garda giving false evidence about him.
IMO, FF/FG voters con themselves into continually voting in those shams and it's okay because...others...something.

Look Christy, Blanch is deflecting! He'll be on about Gerry's peado brother before long...

1. Protective of them- I've been upfront that I see FG and co as best of a bad lot and will defend them as such. However that does not mean that I'm happy with everything they do. Nothing wrong with that IMO.
2. What are you deflecting from? Seems you are an "anyone but United" type fan, where you will gladly rant about FG Monday to Friday but dare anyone mention the alternatives and how they would be worse and you're all over it like a rash.

As regards voters conning themselves, maybe some do. Same as someone voting for Paul Murphy for instance might con themselves in to thinking that everything will be paid for by the rich. Personally I vote for FG as best of a bad lot as I said, if I see an alternative I consider better I will happily vote for them.

Galwayguy35

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Did plenty of wrongdoing himself too.

He sure did, which I mentioned in the bit you left out.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

You mean the people who didn't have to pay anyway, thanks to FG/Lab put effort into protesting?

Bailing out banks was very communist.

To recap; the op is about Murphy leaving a group. Then folk start talking about how all those parties are terrible and I countered with what actual parties with actual power had accomplished. It's not my fault you're protective of them Christy. What am I deflecting away from by the way? Having a counter comment is deflection is it? Deflection would be if I start talking about Horse racing. And why would I be deflecting? I know little to nothing about Murphy outside of three Garda giving false evidence about him.
IMO, FF/FG voters con themselves into continually voting in those shams and it's okay because...others...something.

Look Christy, Blanch is deflecting! He'll be on about Gerry's peado brother before long...

Yawn,

Your post is even more Pythonesque than usual.

What did the Romans FF/FG ever do for us?

OK, apart from motorways, LUAS, jobs, IDA, water, education, sewage etc, and building up an independent country, what did the Romans FF/FG ever do for us?

All right, let's call ourselves the People's Liberation Front of Judea or the Judean People's Liberation Front or the Socialist Party, or the Socialist Workers Party, or People before Profit, or Solidarity or whatever to get rid of the Romans FF/FG.

Oh wait, we're Irish, not Roman, that means the first item on the agenda is the split.

If you can't see what a laughing stock Paul Murphy has made left-wing politics again, you are really missing the point.

P.S. I wasn't deflecting, I was actually defending your Socialist hero comrades by pointing out that the comedy duo of Mick and Clare were far worse than them.

P.P.S. For a minute I forgot that Clare actually came from the same umbrella. Didn't she fall out with them because they didn't like her hanging out with a capitalist developer who didn't pay his taxes and brought the country to rack and ruin? They are just one big joke, the lot of those so-called left-wing politicians.

P.P.P.S. Bringing FF/FG into a discussion laughing at Paul Murphy is a deflection.

James Brown

christy c wrote: »

1. Protective of them- I've been upfront that I see FG and co as best of a bad lot and will defend them as such. However that does not mean that I'm happy with everything they do. Nothing wrong with that IMO.
2. What are you deflecting from? Seems you are an "anyone but United" type fan, where you will gladly rant about FG Monday to Friday but dare anyone mention the alternatives and how they would be worse and you're all over it like a rash.

As regards voters conning themselves, maybe some do. Same as someone voting for Paul Murphy for instance might con themselves in to thinking that everything will be paid for by the rich. Personally I vote for FG as best of a bad lot as I said, if I see an alternative I consider better I will happily vote for them.

I said you were protective. Why is your own business.
Ah, to the casual observer or agenda driven observer sure.
I don't know how they would be worse, possibly as bad in a different manner. TBF we've only ever had variations of FF/FG government. Giving all my energies to criticise others would be pretty pointless unless I had an agenda it makes sense to talk about governments and their policies than scaremongering all opposition. Like that lad earlier said the dutch gold folk out protesting with Murphy. Nobody on welfare was going to have to pay. If anything they'd be telling Murphy to leave well enough alone but for some reason people are quick to blame political nobodies like Murphy for an IW billing set up by FG/Lab, go figure?
I voted FG as best suited to look after things after FF's mess. And lo, FG bring FF to the table with a few sweet deals and a shiny new quango. I'd rather vote for Gino ffs.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Yawn,

....

Indeed, yet here you are like clockwork.
As someone said the other day, you've become a parody of yourself.

[Deleted User]

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I voted FG.

Ah here, would ya stop lad..... :pac:

christy c

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I said you were protective. Why is your own business.
Ah, to the casual observer or agenda driven observer sure.
I don't know how they would be worse, possibly as bad in a different manner. TBF we've only ever had variations of FF/FG government. Giving all my energies to criticise others would be pretty pointless unless I had an agenda it makes sense to talk about governments and their policies than scaremongering all opposition. Like that lad earlier said the dutch gold folk out protesting with Murphy. Nobody on welfare was going to have to pay. If anything they'd be telling Murphy to leave well enough alone but for some reason people are quick to blame political nobodies like Murphy for an IW billing set up by FG/Lab, go figure?
I voted FG as best suited to look after things after FF's mess. And lo, FG bring FF to the table with a few sweet deals and a shiny new quango. I'd rather vote for Gino ffs.

Trying to wade through the sound bites here but you're saying I'm protective? Because I occasionally defend them? Suppose it's better than you calling me a shill as you did before.

I'm certainly not saying put all your energies in to anything. If someone is discussing a political party or individual who could end up in government, it may be best to contribute/ignore rather than coming in with the usual "look over there" posts. There's plenty of FG threads to choose from should you wish to talk about them.

James Brown

christy c wrote: »

Trying to wade through the sound bites here but you're saying I'm protective? Because I occasionally defend them? Suppose it's better than you calling me a shill as you did before.

I'm certainly not saying put all your energies in to anything. If someone is discussing a political party or individual who could end up in government, it may be best to contribute/ignore rather than coming in with the usual "look over there" posts. There's plenty of FG threads to choose from should you wish to talk about them.

What sound bites?
Nope I'm saying you can't help but dive in when I criticise them.
But people posted on what these parties might be like. I gave a comment comparing to what we've had before/currently.
You took it upon yourself to jump on that. I was done at the comment. Here you are a number of posts later still hung up on it.
Tell you what, next time there's a discussion on FG and blanch bails in with Jean McConville I'll give you a shout.

Hotblack Desiato

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

He sure did, which I mentioned in the bit you left out.

Sure, although you didn't mention that he stole his employees' pension contributions, then got caught committing a massive VAT fraud.

christy c wrote: »

If someone is discussing a political party or individual who could end up in government

The likes of Murphy would completely sh!t himself if somehow he ever found himself part of a government. He'd much rather be the hurler on the ditch who finds fault with everything and has to take responsibility for nothing.

it may be best to contribute/ignore rather than coming in with the usual "look over there" posts. There's plenty of FG threads to choose from should you wish to talk about them.

Indeed...

christy c

Matt Barrett wrote: »

What sound bites?
Nope I'm saying you can't help but dive in when I criticise them.
But people posted on what these parties might be like. I gave a comment comparing to what we've had before/currently.
You took it upon yourself to jump on that. I was done at the comment. Here you are a number of posts later still hung up on it.
Tell you what, next time there's a discussion on FG and blanch bails in with Jean McConville I'll give you a shout.

Sound bites: sweet deals, quangos.

I can't help but dive in: my few hundred posts in 10+ years would indicate otherwise.

Ok so you were comparing PBP to FG rather than deflecting? Fair enough, although might have been useful to know whether you agreed/disagreed with criticism of said party before talking about FG.

As regards Jean McConville, I'm reasonably sure I've never commented on her so you can leave me out of that one. My main criticism of Gerry and co is their economic policy, not anything to do with the North.

James Brown

christy c wrote: »

Sound bites: sweet deals, quangos.

I can't help but dive in: my few hundred posts in 10+ years would indicate otherwise.

Ok so you were comparing PBP to FG rather than deflecting? Fair enough, although might have been useful to know whether you agreed/disagreed with criticism of said party before talking about FG.

As regards Jean McConville, I'm reasonably sure I've never commented on her so you can leave me out of that one. My main criticism of Gerry and co is their economic policy, not anything to do with the North.

Excuse me these are actually things that cost the tax payer money, not to be dismissed.
Look, go ahead with your Paul Murphy and everyone not FG or FF is bad. Enjoy.
Does talking about my alleged deflection for several posts count as deflection of FF/FG record as compared to Murphy et al??

Portsalon

Greyfox wrote: »

Someone try's to offer an alternative to FF/FG, not a great alternative but still at least someone is trying and this is the way people react. And people actually wonder why FF/FG continue to ruin the country

So presumably you'd prefer to see it ruined in a different way?

christy c

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Excuse me these are actually things that cost the tax payer money, not to be dismissed.
Look, go ahead with your Paul Murphy and everyone not FG or FF is bad. Enjoy.
Does talking about my alleged deflection for several posts count as deflection of FF/FG record as compared to Murphy et al??

Never said things were to be dismissed, just that you dressed it up as a nice sound bite.

"Paul Murphy and everyone not FG or FF is bad" is something you made up, I think they're all bad. Some less so than others.

Does talking about your deflection count as deflection? I'd say no, because that wasn't what the thread was about. But a thread about their various records and promises might be useful in helping people to decide who to vote for. Your approach usually involves looking at FF or FG only.

Portsalon

victor8600 wrote: »

Like a capitalism where failing banks are allowed to go bust and corrupt bankers go to jail? And don't tell me that we had to bail them out to save pension funds and personal savings -- we could guarantee those for a fraction of the cost.

Absolutely not. Unfortunately you don't appear to have understood what I posted. Apologies for using long sentences.

And partially quoting it in order to produce a wholly false and misleading conclusion is exactly the sort of thing that I'd expect from supporters of the Murphy cretin belt.

James Brown

christy c wrote: »

Never said things were to be dismissed, just that you dressed it up as a nice sound bite.

"Paul Murphy and everyone not FG or FF is bad" is something you made up, I think they're all bad. Some less so than others.

Does talking about your deflection count as deflection? I'd say no, because that wasn't what the thread was about. But a thread about their various records and promises might be useful in helping people to decide who to vote for. Your approach usually involves looking at FF or FG only.

Okay so. Paul Murphy, a minor league politician, who I've never voted for, hasn't done much aside from jump on the IW bandwagon and be harassed by the Garda.
That's my view of him. Some people whinge about him and others on single digit support in the polls like they are the coming horsemen, no matter.
So I guess that's the discussion over. Great stuff.

JohnnyFlash

Who gets to have custody of the megaphone is the hardest part of any socialist breakup.

christy c

Matt Barrett wrote: »

So I guess that's the discussion over.

Why would it be over? Plenty more you could discuss if you wanted such as his economic policies, being elected to break the law, etc.

But he is "minor league" (I agree BTW), so which politicians are not minor league and can be discussed in detail outside FF & FG?

NIMAN

Some funny lines in this piece
https://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/eilis-ohanlon-the-launch-of-a-new-socialist-party-is-the-laugh-that-we-all-needed-in-worrying-times-38543837.html

"Murphy splits from himself ..."

"Elsewhere, the political stakes couldn't be higher. There are only weeks to go until a no-deal Brexit. Now along comes this welcome reminder that there are corners of Irish politics where the stakes literally couldn't be smaller".

"There's no point trying to analyse what this new Comrades R Us party will mean politically one way or another. That's a task which would only be of interest to about half a dozen people in Dublin with nothing better to do with their time than fight over whether the revolution should start next Tuesday lunchtime or leave it until after the pubs close on Friday".

lola85

Strange thing is he and his ilk get a massive amount of airtime and platform from the media.

I scratch my head that they are on everyday rambling about something.

It shows which side the media swing to in Ireland.

facehugger99

lola85 wrote: »

Strange thing is he and his ilk get a massive amount of airtime and platform from the media.

I scratch my head that they are on everyday rambling about something.

It shows which side the media swing to in Ireland.

The mainstream media, and RTE in particular, are massively left-leaning.

Whenever you hear any of the lunatic fringe being interviewed on Morning Ireland for example, they are allowed carte blanche to spot their nonsense with very little challenge.

The Black Oil

Good old far Left. Can't even agree on the stuff they agree on.

CrankyHaus wrote: »

The far Left called out Irish Water as the crony stuffed, inefficient Quango shuffling along on spin and zombie accounting that it was long before it was cool, at a time when SF wouldn't touch the issue. They did it for their own reasons and they mobilised a pack of scroungers for their own ends but they still did it, and they deserve some credit for that

You may as well be describing the HSE. Any word from Paul et al on when they'll be mobilising thousands to march about it?

Roger_007

Some people wonder why genuine left wing politics in Ireland never gets much support. The likes of Paul Murphy is the reason. If there is the minutest of policy difference between any two left politicians they have the traditional Irish 'split' and form a new grouping or party.
Essentially the left are so absorbed in the purity of their political ideology that they forget that to get anything done you have to cooperate with others who may not share every scintilla of your beliefs.
Paul Murphy and others like Ruth Coppinger and Rich Boy Barret enjoy oodles of exposure in the media far in excess of the proportion of the population that they represent. This is exactly what they want. They would run a mile from accepting any position of responsibility lest they might have to make any real-world decisions or choices and thereby compromise their political purity.

NIMAN

For me, the likes of Murphy, Boyd-Barrett and Coppinger are almost 'playing' at politics, rather than being real politicians.

A lot of what they believe in is fanciful stuff in the real world. Can't really happen, be affordable by the State, but they know they can moan about it because they will never have to actually implement any policies themselves.

Appeals to a small minority of the voting population who also believe the nonsense,but most sensible people know we aren't able to live in this socialist utopia they dream of.