Sinn fein- the new nazi party?

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

Sleepy

Originally posted by David-[RLD]-
Nobody uses terms like "PUP / UVF", "UDP / UDA", "RSF / RIRA" or "32CSM / CIRA" so why constantly use "Sinn Féin / IRA"? We've already established the fact that links are present, so why keep pushing on it?

When the same men are known to be the heads of both organisations I think it's perfectly reasonable.

Originally posted by David-[RLD]-
Actually, COMMUNISM died with the fall of the Berlin wall, and still not completely. North Korea is still Communist. Cuba is still Communist. And so on..

Until they learn to give up Socialism? You're the one who's sounding like a Nazi now. That's how Hitler was: "become a Socialist and I get the SS to shoot you." Better Socialist than Facist. The north is not "about blood feuds", although some people seem to use religion as an excuse to kill people.

So you have no pity towards the hunger strikers whatsoever? They gave their lives for living improvements for the people. It's easy to kill for a cause, but to die for one takes courage. They're a legitimate political party already. Sinn Féin have been a legitimate political party since they were established all those decades ago.

Yes, North Korea & Cuba, such shining lights of political freedom and societel wellbeing:rolleyes:

Socialism is naieveté applied to the government of countries instead of the sensible application of the economic tools to build a modern society.

The majority of killings in the north over the last 40 years have been revenge attacks, turf wars and personal vendettas. Don't try to dress it up as anything more than it was: mass murder.

Pity for convicted criminals that are stupid enough to kill themselves? Not really. Do you feel sorry for suicide bombers? I suppose a case can be made for sympathising with their ignorance and being sorry that they knew no better but that's about the height of it really.

Xterminator

Originally posted by David-[RLD]-
........... Everyone has links to some form of criminal activity in one way or another. Doesn't necessarily mean that Sinn Féin go out when they're not in suits and ties and shoot people. What's that I hear? Ten-year-long ceasefire? Thought so.
.

David

I am a bit dumbfounded by your assesment that everbody has links to criminal activity.I can only think that you belive it is normal, but that does not make it so.
Your statment is another baseless assertment, one in a stream from the propaganda machine which you have also not dismantled.

As for you 10 year ceasefire, the paramilitiary activity have not ceased.

Punishment beatings, People being chased from where they live by IRA/SF's mandate etc. Regardless of the supposed crimes of the indivuals, they have the right to trial by their peers. Only the garda have the right to detain these indivuals.

These are just some of the activites i belive Sinn Fein activists are involved in/complict in when they have taken off their campaign suits!

Also, when will all the IRA weapons be answered for? How many have 'fallen' into the hands of armed criminals? how many have been 'retrieved' by so called radical republicans? Funny how since the ceasfire(s) the no's of guns on the streets has rapidly increased. I suppose though if you use some of youre funds to buy all your trained killers taxi licences, etc they will never cause any trouble again eh?

X

ziggy sawdust

In the recent local elections, I was very disappointed to hear chants of "Up the 'RA, up the 'RA" upon the election of a Sinn Fein Councillor to a seat.

I really had hoped that the active supporters of the party might have moved up a peg from this sort of backward and frankly pathetic chant.

Oh well......

The Corinthian

Originally posted by earwicker
Of course, the only way to actually prove the original poster's contention if you agree with him would be to go through the Nazi party literature and compare it carefully with the SF discussion documents, point by point, policy by policy, and build your case.

Not really. We can say that the two are broadly similar on many points with regard to the use of violence as a legitimate tool of politics, State interference (or even planning; this is often unclear in the different Fascist regimes or Sinn Fein’s own literature) in the market and the ideal of the nation as the ultimate rally point or focus of the citizen. Add to this many trappings, such as the employment of paramilitary groups and the setting aside of one ethnic group against another, living in the same location.

However, to go as far as to say that Sinn Fein is a Nazi party would be unfair and frankly too specific to prove. Nonetheless there is certainly enough there without having to dig too deeply to say that Sinn Fein’s ideology would be more akin to the Fascist family of movements than any Socialist-communist ones.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by David-[RLD]-
There is and always has been a difference between common "republicanism" (i.e. the American Republican Party) and Irish Republicanism.

So, define Irish Republicanism for me, and explain how Fianna Fáil have twisted it and why it makes no sense.

I trust that you're going to give me authoritative sources for your definitions rather than simply telling me what you believe they mean.

earwicker

Originally posted by The Corinthian
Not really. We can say that the two are broadly similar on many points with regard to the use of violence as a legitimate tool of politics, State interference (or even planning; this is often unclear in the different Fascist regimes or Sinn Fein’s own literature) in the market and the ideal of the nation as the ultimate rally point or focus of the citizen. Add to this many trappings, such as the employment of paramilitary groups and the setting aside of one ethnic group against another, living in the same location.

However, to go as far as to say that Sinn Fein is a Nazi party would be unfair and frankly too specific to prove. Nonetheless there is certainly enough there without having to dig too deeply to say that Sinn Fein’s ideology would be more akin to the Fascist family of movements than any Socialist-communist ones.

A few minor quibbles:

Are you saying that SF are not committed to the GFA and all that it entails? I note that a lot of their bumf states that they are. You'd probably agree that "lefties" have also advocated the use of violence as a political tool as well?

Surely you'd accept that State intervention in the market is not the sole preserve of Fascism?

I don't have much to dispute in your mention of the nation as a rallying point (and consequent mistrust of Europe). The simple one-to-one of Nazism and SF is, as you say, somewhat misguided. The Nazi "25 points" has a much more restrictive idea of who can belong to the German State. If you were to do a quick run-through of the SF literature, you'd find what seems to this reader at least be a definite "lefty" approach to questions and issues concerning immigration and residency.

AngelofFire

Ive never seen so much tripe in my life. Will the sinn fein bashing please stop. Im no sinn feiner nor am i a big fan of republicanism. But i gave one of the sinn fein candidates in my area a high preference because he had a proven track record and a done a lot of work in my community.I accept that much of their vote was one of protest but at least they care about the plight of ordinary people.

Sinn fein if anything are the polar opposite of nazism. SF are left wing and libretarian whilst facism is right wing and authoritarian www.politicalcompass.org.The closet thing we have ever had to a facist party in this country is Fine Gael, who merged with the blueshirt movement to become the party they are today.F.G have been the country`s traditonal Right wing party, they have supported polices like european militarisation and the power of the state to restrict civil liberties. BTW im not FG bashing just stating a few facts.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by earwicker
Are you saying that SF are not committed to the GFA and all that it entails? I note that a lot of their bumf states that they are.

Of course they do, but they’ve never rejected the concept of violence as a legitimate political tool either. If anything the struggle has been romanticised in much the same way that Fascism romanticised the March on Rome or the Munich Punch.

You'd probably agree that "lefties" have also advocated the use of violence as a political tool as well?

Indeed, but I would not have made that comparison based upon only the one or two similarities.

Surely you'd accept that State intervention in the market is not the sole preserve of Fascism?

Again, I would not have made that comparison based upon only the one or two similarities.

In addition, Fascism and Socialism-Communism have strong similarities - John Maynard Keynes, who’s economic philosophy is the basis of the modern welfare state also happened to be a big fan of the Third Reich’s economic policies too, for example.

I don't have much to dispute in your mention of the nation as a rallying point (and consequent mistrust of Europe).

The simple one-to-one of Nazism and SF is, as you say, somewhat misguided. The Nazi "25 points" has a much more restrictive idea of who can belong to the German State.

I don’t think SF is racialist, at least consciously, and this was a fairly fundamental principle of German National Socialism, so a specific comparison would not really hold. However, racialism in Nazi ideology was pretty much unique amongst the other Fascist movements (that were not puppet or satellite states of the Third Reich, that is), so it doesn’t really affect a comparison to Fascism in general.

If you were to do a quick run-through of the SF literature, you'd find what seems to this reader at least be a definite "lefty" approach to questions and issues concerning immigration and residency.

You’ll get similar "lefty" approaches within most Fascist ideologies as they tend consider the nation to be a cultural rather than racial concepts - judging a man by the colour of his shirt rather than the colour of his skin, as it were.

arcadegame2004

Sinn fein if anything are the polar opposite of nazism. SF are left wing and libretarian whilst facism is right wing and authoritarian www.politicalcompass.org.The closet thing we have ever had to a facist party in this country is Fine Gael, who merged with the blueshirt movement to become the party they are today.F.G have been the country`s traditonal Right wing party, they have supported polices like european militarisation and the power of the state to restrict civil liberties. BTW im not FG bashing just stating a few facts.

Authoritarianism is certainly not the preserve of the Right. Look at Stalin for example. a Left-Wing tyrant responsible for the deaths of up to 40 million of the Soviet people. Or Mao Zedong, who reportedly worked 100 million people to death in his so-called "Great Leap Forward" agricultural collectivisation program. He killed far more people even than Hitler. There was a big rumpus when Joerg Haider's Freedom Party (Far-Right) was let into a coalition government in Austria but not a whimper when Communists became junior partners in the French Socialist Government of 1997-2002. Hypocrisy.

I accept that the first FG (or Cumman na nGael as they were then called) Government were quite conservative in economic-policy, e.g. reducing social-welfare. But comparing them to fascism is just over the top. The merger that became Fine Gael was not just between Cumman na nGael and the Blueshirts. A party called the Centre Party was also part of the merger. I personally feel that the Blueshirts were more of an anti-FF movement than a fascist one, with the possible exception of their leader. I consider FG to be a centrist-party, like FF but perhaps much less corrupt. Like FF they adopt the policies of their junior coalition partners to a certain extent. That is why the FF-PD government has been more centre-right than any government since Cosgrave (1922-32) and I am glad it has been, though I lament the fact that FF, strengthened by winning 81 seats in 2002, has been far less keen on PD policies like lower taxes and privatising of semi-states, this time around. They were re-elected when they followed such policies from 1997-02. Maybe Mary Harney is right about the loss of support being linked to an incapacity to take important decisions.

earwicker

Originally posted by The Corinthian

<snip>

I'm not entirely sure about what you're getting at in your post, but it's obvious that we don't agree, so let's agree to disagree, shall we?

Sand

Its clear that the SF bear more than a passing resemblance to the Nazis in terms of the general policies, attitudes, paramilitary connections. Hell, if they even rise to power in Ireland, itll be for the same reasons the Nazis gained power in Germany - a populace disillusioned with mainstream politics looking for some messanic type saviors to lead them to the promised land. The Corninthian has already identified many the similarities, and Mike 65 went to some bother getting links in a previous thread identifying the Nazis policies as socialist/left wing. The people who refuse to accept the reality that Nazism was left wing should really do a search on Mikes posts and educate themselves, tbh.

What's all this nonsense about "building an Ireland of equals"? Do they mean everyone will have an equal chance of getting kneecapped or tortured?

Ah here now - theyre only bringing the power back to the people. Sure, we dont need to work with the PSNI or try to give them any legitimacy in SF/IRA areas in the north - that might work to undermine the IRA mafias that rule the roost in those estates now wouldnt it? Hey, with a bit of luck theyll bring the policing polices down to Dublin as well. Why arrest scumbags when you can give them balaclavas, enlist them in the IRA and turn them loose in the city?

So you have no pity towards the hunger strikers whatsoever? They gave their lives for living improvements for the people. It's easy to kill for a cause, but to die for one takes courage.

Garbage - They didnt give their lives for a cause, they joined a terrorist organisation and murdered for a cause. They went on hunger strike purely because if they didnt *demand* POW status they might, just might have to examine whether their murderous campaign was simple a killing spree by a gang of a murderers. It was purely selfish vanity on their part, so they could continue the fantasy of pretending they were soldiers.

Id have almost agreed with them being treated as POWs so they could have been tried for war crimes and executed like the Nazi leadership.

But sure, if they want to die for their cause Ill back them 100%. Theres some high cliffs they can run off and rot at the bottom of for all I care. Ireland will be a better place for their loss.

monument

Originally posted by The Brigadier
Cue Monument, Mighty Mouse irish1 and the other shinners asking you to prove that.

:rolleyes:

Could you possable stop calling me a "shinner"? (thanks)

Originally posted by Marq
I think it's somewhat assertive to say that most sinn féiners would have no idea how to run a country

On that point, they're just like Fianna Fail.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by AngelofFire
Sinn fein if anything are the polar opposite of nazism.

Seeing you quoted that site you probably should have read it properly:

The chart also makes clear that, despite popular perceptions, the opposite of fascism is not communism but anarchism (ie liberal socialism), and that the opposite of communism ( i.e. an entirely state-planned economy) is neo-liberalism (i.e. extreme deregulated economy)

Are SF anarchists then?

AngelofFire

Originally posted by arcadegame2004
Authoritarianism is certainly not the preserve of the Right.

I agree with you and i refute any claims that it is. We have many libretarian right wing parties such as the PDs and the libreterian party in america.But i also refute claims that any socialist movement is akin to authoritarian communist and facist regiemes such as ones in china,germany,italy and russia. I was trying to say that comparisons between sinn fein and facsim on the grounds of them calling for state regulation of the market is invalid as socially they are polar opposites and often quite different economically. Under facist regiemes in italy and germany there was little or no change in the distribution of the wealth.

sceptre

Originally posted by The Corinthian
In addition, Fascism and Socialism-Communism have strong similarities - John Maynard Keynes, who’s economic philosophy is the basis of the modern welfare state also happened to be a big fan of the Third Reich’s economic policies too, for example.

To be fair, despite what Lewellyn Rockwell would like us to believe (meanwhile Ralph Raico reckons Keynes was a Red), it's more correct to say that Hitler was a big fan of Keynes than the reverse. Like that FDR bloke. You could argue more sensibly that Keynes admired the German economic output due in part to the employment of his ideas. The introduction to the German edition of The General Theory merely said that Keynes' (original) theory of output was more easily adapted to conditions in a totalitarian state than under laissez-faire conditions. Which, examining the model, it was. I'm sure there were plenty of Keynesians who appreciated the deficits run during German depression and regarded it as vindication of their views[1]. Which in itself it wasn't of course - the early general theory really only applies during a time of depression. This is the bit the Friedmanites tried to apply in an actual general sense of course with their wacky ideas about money velocity. Even Keynes wasn't nutty enough to sugest that as viable (hence the intro). Still, you can regard it as Keynes' Chile (if you don't want to use the US) if you please.

[1]George Garvy's written some interesting papers about this. To be taken with a grain of salt as he does like putting the cart before the horse but interesting nonetheless

monument

Originally posted by AngelofFire
I agree with you and i refute any claims that it is. We have many libretarian right wing parties such as the PDs and the libreterian party in america.

If you're still going on the Political Compass' image, the PD are not social-libertarian (which is what the 'libertarian' that is here (same link as above):

...However, they are economic-libertarian, which on the Political Compass image is right wing.

gaelic cowboy

Originally posted by Agent Orange
Mary Lou was easily the most attractive looking of the EU candidates. No wonder she won.

The fact her party is made up of and affiliated with child-murdering psychopaths is a tad worrying however.

If you want to vote for a republican party then vote for a proper republican party - even Fianna Fail. At least they don't kill people.

Interesting how she used to be Fianna Fail member and even was asked to stand in the last general election by them. She jumped ship and became Sinn Fein the two parties are blood brothers and they probally can't wait to get into bed together. If any of you even give a feck about democracy dont vote SF or FF ever.

The Corinthian

Originally posted by earwicker
I'm not entirely sure about what you're getting at in your post, but it's obvious that we don't agree, so let's agree to disagree, shall we?

We didn't disagree on everything, but if that is what your wish, so be it.

AngelofFire

Originally posted by monument
If you're still going on the Political Compass' image, the PD are not social-libertarian (which is what the 'libertarian' that is here (same link as above):

...However, they are economic-libertarian, which on the Political Compass image is right wing.

Sorry that was an error on my behalf, i initially meant to say economic libretarian

Marq

Originally posted by Sleepy
I don't believe the ignorant deserve a vote

I suppose to enforce this we'll just let you go around and decide who's ignorant?

It's something that should be taught in school. We have free second level education and an almost free 3rd level system so if you can't be arsed learning about how a country should be run, why should you have a say in running it?

Good idea, yes, only let politics students vote. You'd be screwed then Sleepy - they're all lefties.

On a more serious note, it's not enough to say that the education is there and it's free, and if people don't use it it's their own fault. There are many factors that contribute to poverty and lack of education: If you have to work to help feed your family it's highly unlikely you'll be finishing out second level education, let alone going to college. The same factors contribute to people feeling disenfranchised. We should be tackling those problems, not disenfranchising these people further.

swiss

This thread is veering quite off topic. Just a few points.

Firstly, the amount of bickering and name calling in this thread is rising. I think we can do without the snide sideswipes towards other posters. Merc, if you have a problem with how we moderate this thread then either take it to Feedback or PM one of us. If you have a problem with a specific post then by all means report it. Veering off topic by accusing another poster of going off topic and baiting and then exlaiming "for shame" is just hypocritical. The fact that you were aware of this doesn't make it any less so.

Secondly when this thread was opened my initial reaction was firstly that Goodwins law would be shortly invoked, and also the point that The Corinthian raised, about Nationalism and Socialism being (in theory) two of SF's core principles. However, the term Nazi, as I'm sure all of you are aware, invokes more than just their social and economic doctrine. It is a comparison to the spirit of Nazism, which was guilty of some of the worst atrocities ever perpetrated by the human race. Thus when you compare any individual or group to the Nazi's you also by extension invoke this comparison. Unless the person/group in question is actually a Nazi, this is rarely a fair comparison.

Most of you are already aware of my opinions regarding Sinn Féin. I distrust them. I condemn their ongoing links to paramilitarism. I believe that they are ever ready to go back to the route of bombing and killing should it look like they will not achieve thier goals by democratic means. Unless they can adequetely demonstrate that these ways are behind them (which I highly doubt for the short to medium term) I will never vote for them.

However, I would still baulk at labelling them 'Nazis'.

Mighty_Mouse

Where did I deduce your dislike of English people? Well most recently when you decided to call me Brigadier General, bus77 pointed this out to be a reference to the Houses of Parliament. (I assume since you did not correct this, that it was correct)

How unlike you to again be presumptuous? Don't deduce the "undeducable" Brigadiar. Actually it was just a play on a Christ Moore song. No biggy. I sorry, I increased your rank did I?

just shoot yourself now and save the British Army the bullet because you're a moron.

And again those irrational Shin Feiners lose their heads!I'm afraid the only response I have is to quote myself again:

Yes, those who died on hunger strike are the thick, ignorant ones!

Originally posted by Sleepy
I don't believe the ignorant deserve a vote

Nice!! Very nice!! Another sign of those god dam republicans being evil enough to encourage "low-lifes" to vote. Did you actually say you werent an elitist?

---

oops sorry swiss!!! Wont contribute to the dragging of topic to nomans land again!

AngelofFire

Originally posted by Sleepy
I don't believe the ignorant deserve a vote tbh.

so what you are trying to say is unless one votes for Fianna Fail and the PDs, one is not using his/her vote properley.

Im sorry sleepy but there is no objective proper or inproper when it comes to someone using their vote-unless they write the F word on their ballet paper or something and then spol it.Everyone has the right to express political opinion in our society be it ignorant, informed or whatever its one of the hallmarks of our democracy.

Sleepy

Elitest no. Meritocrisist, probably.

Marq, I don't suggest that only politics students get a vote, I said those with a basic understanding of how to run a government i.e. those with an understanding of economics (which to use your logic would mean any politics students would be screwed).

I honestly don't know how you can argue that an uneducated vote is one worth being heard. Oh, that's right, you support a party that relies on an uneducated vote. One that believes coloquial politics is still important. One that "makes a stand" for people who think they're above paying their way in life.

If the only "education" a person recieves comes from a party that spouts nothing but propaganda, their vote is uneducated and, frankly, dangerous.

Mighty_Mouse, I withdraw the "shoot yourself" remark, it was out of line. That said, yes, once again, you must be reminded that those you idolise and make martyrs of were indeed ignorant. Your culture brought them up to know nothing but death, and in their twisted perspecives they died glorious ones. Unfortunately, they were over fifty years behind the times and, like all Sinn Fein / IRA supporters, unable to accept reality.

Sleepy

Originally posted by AngelofFire
so what you are trying to say is unless one votes for Fianna Fail and the PDs, one is not using his/her vote properley.

Im sorry sleepy but there is no objective proper or inproper when it comes to someone using their vote-unless they write the F word on their ballet paper or something and then spol it.Everyone has the right to express political opinion in our society be it ignorant, informed or whatever its one of the hallmarks of our democracy.

A vote for FF is just as spoiled as a vote for SF imho.

When a vote is cast from ignorance it is a dangerous thing. Just look at the current corruption that's evolved from the blind voting for Fianna Fail, regardless of how they behave in government.

swiss

The issue of who has a 'right' to vote is somewhat off topic, but I'll briefly give my view here.

My view is that a plan to only allow people with a baseline knowledge of politics/economics to vote is unworkable. For a start, there are very intelligent and informed people out there who have very little formal education. For example an elderly neigbour of mine is very well read and assimilates a great deal of information from national and international press, but only received a primary level education in his youth. I don't think he ever undertook a 'formal' course in economics or politics. Yet I would consider him to be more savvy than some college graduates.

Similarly, how would you intend to check for a level of knowledge in the fields of economics/politics? A written exam? Would this not mitigate against those who may have certain learning difficulties, but are otherwise knowledgeable? An oral exam? What form would the questions take? What if someone knows a great deal of general information about a party, but can't quite put thier finger on fact X, Y or Z?

I do think that there is an onus on people to at least learn something about a given situation before making a decision. This is especially true of voting. However, while I believe that your proposal that people are required to have a level of knowledge before being allowed to vote is well intentioned, it is impractical. It also has the potential to stir up considerable resentment. People simply would not like the implication that they are too ill informed to vote, and would also likely resent the 'forced' learning that this doctrine would implement.

The potential for abuse is also too great, IMO. Once you start 'educating' people, what facts do you include and what facts do you omit? Whose 'truth' is taught?

I'm afraid I'm guilty of going far off topic here, and I would ask that people go back on the topic in hand. If people want to discuss educational requirements then I recommend someone start up a seperate thread. I will then move all relevant posts to that thread from this one.

Marq

Originally posted by Sleepy
Elitest no. Meritocrisist, probably.
Marq, I don't suggest that only politics students get a vote, I said those with a basic understanding of how to run a government i.e. those with an understanding of economics.

Again, you miss the point, how exactly is it defined who has that understanding? you'll just have to put up with the fact that not everyone votes the same way as you do - this might be becuase they don't have a "basic understanding of how to run a government" or perhaps it is simply because they don't hold the same idealogical viewpoints as you do. Many economists (and economics students for that matter!) lean towards the left, others towards the right. understanding economics does not mean that you will not vote for Sinn Fein.

I personally feel that this growth for Sinn Fein is due to these voters feeling abandoned by other parties, and feeling like they have no voice. They feel that their involvement in politics is pointless and therefore unnecessary. The wonderful thing about this election result is that like it or lump it, these people who haven't voted for years are reinvolving themselves with the democratic system. Perhaps next time around they won't vote for Sinn Fein. What's important is that they vote.

Not to put too fine a point on it (in fact, a cliched one): that's democracy, deal with it.

AngelofFire

Originally posted by Sleepy
A vote for FF is just as spoiled as a vote for SF imho.

When a vote is cast from ignorance it is a dangerous thing. Just look at the current corruption that's evolved from the blind voting for Fianna Fail, regardless of how they behave in government.

Having self appointed moral dictators decide who should have the right to vote is even more dangerous. I gave a sinn fein candidate a high preference and he has already delivered a new bottle bank. The only danger in that is if i cut myself with the glass when im taking the bottles down.

It is also notoriously patronising to say that free education and a good welfare system is an adeaquate subsitute for giving ordinary people a right to vote. Its not much different than Gladstones policy of constructive unionism towards ireland in the 19th century which involved killing home rule with kindness.sure them fenians wont want home rule if we abolish the grand jury system and introduce the local government act,that will shut them up, they dont even know whats good for them

Mighty_Mouse

Elitest no. Meritocrisist,

Never been a philospher but do you not have to be one to be the other.

The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favored treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.

A group of leaders or officeholders selected on the basis of individual ability or achievement

Ruled by the intellectually elite? I suppose it doesnt really matter and I'm not 100 per cent sure.

oh, that's right, you support a party that relies on an uneducated vote.

I think its this kind of attitude which is refered to as arrogance in the government/(elite?).At the end of the day, I wouldnt consider myself uneducated or ignorant yet agree with most of Sinn Feins policies. Is gerry adams uneducated?

Mighty_Mouse, I withdraw the "shoot yourself" remark, it was out of line

Is a withdrawal an apology? lol I can see your political correctness been stretched from here on that one so I wont push it !:D

Your culture

let me stop you there.........whats "my culture" and how is it different to yours?

Unfortunately, they were over fifty years behind the times and

50 years behind what?

like all Sinn Fein / IRA supporters, unable to accept reality.

At last I agree with you. Unable to accept the reality of second class citizenship and social injustice!

Hagar

Dark_Knight_Ire I have a hornet's nest that need stirring up.
Any chance you could drop around.
You seem to be the right man for the job.

Fionnan

" I gave a sinn fein candidate a high preference and he has already delivered a new bottle bank. The only danger in that is if i cut myself with the glass when im taking the bottles down."

Er, bottle bank delivered too quickly to be the responsibility of the Shinner. Typical work done by somebody else(on the previous council), is claimed by a Shinner. Pathetic

Sleepy

Yes Mighty Mouse you can take the withdrawal as an apology. Accusing me of Political Correctness is quite amusing though...

While yourself or Gerry Adams may be educated (however misguided), Sinn Fein are heavily reliant on street corner politics, "fighting" for the "rights" of people to not pay charges that the rest of the country had done for years etc. Largely targeting the politically unaware and trying to win small local battles instead of working towards the bigger picture. A country has to be run at a national level, not based on who you owe favours to (this applies equally to FF).

It's great if Sinn Fein can get more people interested in politics. The problem I see here is that if these people don't look elsewhere to learn about what they're voting about/for and the consequences of those votes, the wrong decisions will be made for the good of all in our country.

While ideally, only those fit to vote would be given one, this is unfortunately impractical and impossible(?) to implement. What we do need to do is work for the long - term and incorporate a political education into our secondary level education system. That way, hopefully our children won't make the same political mistakes as our parents did and might finally be able to govern for the bigger picture, instead of towards Dev's bloody-minded notion of comely maidens dancing at the crossroads of a rural idyl that never existed in the first place.

Your culture and the culture of your party is one of violence, bloodfeud, the Wolfetones and the pillorising of morons such as the hunger strikers. I don't subscribe to any of these things so our cultures are obviously quite different.

The hungerstrikers were 50 years behind the need for martyrs, Pierce et al had already done it in 1916.

Unable to accept the reality of second class citizenship and social injustice!

Sorry, but who in the Republic of Ireland are second class citizens?

Social injustice is reality, unfortunate yes, but killing the economy with socialism isn't going to heal it. If anything, under that scheme those you look to help will be hurt the most as they don't have any financial backup and a socialist state wouldn't have the cash to support them. At least in the current system there are opportunities for all to better their position in society. Wipe out our economy (which socialism would certainly do given our reliance on the USA) and you'd only hurt those you seek to help. Certainly, we need more public spending on health, education and crime prevention (which imho could be funded by the creation of a third tax band of approx 60% on earnings in excess of 80K per annum but that's another debate) but a centrally controlled government and punishment beatings are not the way to achieve this.

Marq

Originally posted by Sleepy
I honestly don't know how you can argue that an uneducated vote is one worth being heard. Oh, that's right, you support a party that relies on an uneducated vote. One that believes coloquial politics is still important. One that "makes a stand" for people who think they're above paying their way in life.

I assume that you are referring to Sinn Fein.
I would like to state that I do not in fact support Sinn Fein. I voted no in the poll and have never voted for Sinn Fein in my life, nor do I believe that I ever will. I vote Labour.

I do however support the right of people to vote for whomever they please, and while I do not agree with Sinn Fein or their brand of socialism, it is not my place to judge those that do to be wrong or call them uneducated. There's no such thing as a wrong vote, it's just a vote.

The other point that I have consistently made and you have consistently ignored is that appealing to the "uneducated" vote is a good thing, because it now forces those parties which have not been engaging with that demographic to do so. If other parties have to engage with this demographic it's good for them in the long run, even if, as you believe will happen, Sinn Fein fails them on local council this time around.

Marq

monument

How SF are 'doing it', why comments from Michael McDowell (like 'Sleepy' here) are helping them, and more...


SF: a lot done, more to do
http://www.thepost.ie/web/Sitemap/1.9did-455516546-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FComment-and-Analysis.asp

By Brian Feeney

====================

"It's *NOT* the economy, stupid"... (x2)

Nation needs a shrink, not more economic arguments
http://www.thepost.ie/web/Sitemap/1.9did-544707646-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FComment-and-Analysis.asp

By David McWilliams


Never mind the economy,stupid - listen to vox pops
http://www.thepost.ie/web/Sitemap/1.9did-549072646-pageUrl--2FThe-Newspaper-2FSundays-Paper-2FComment-and-Analysis.asp

By Tom McGurk

Hagar

Originally posted by Sleepy
That way, hopefully our children won't make the same political mistakes as our parents did and might finally be able to govern for the bigger picture, instead of towards Dev's bloody-minded notion of comely maidens dancing at the crossroads of a rural idyl that never existed in the first place.

Dev founded Fianna Fáil not Sinn Féin.

But just to be sure I went down to the crossroads and there were no comely maidens but there was a gang of skangers hassleing two pensioners at the bus stop. The was a Roumanian playing an accordian badly accompanied by his wife selling the Big Issue, and a big black woman carryin two Lidl bags with her child tied to her back. The child must have been teething or somthing because he appeared to be chewing happily on his Irish Passport.

I think its about time someone else had a say in the running of this country and looks like a sizeable percentage of other voters agree.

Who was it that said "behold the risen people"?

earwicker

Originally posted by The Corinthian
We didn't disagree on everything, but if that is what your wish, so be it.

Indeed, and I felt a little sad backing out (although given what's happened since perhaps not a bad idea...).

"Leftie" policies/ strategies in "rightie" parties (and vice versa) is common enough. Absolutely no argument from me.

I wanted to agree to disagree because it seemed pointless to debate how "leftie" or "rightie" SF are if they may be said to borrow elements that are easily recognized as being from either side of the political spectrum. It just seemed that we might end up having an absurd conversation that recognized these elements, but with us arguing abstractly about how "right" or "left" they are.

My own position is that since they in practice identify themselves as "leftie," this practical identification informs my assessment of the party and my reading of its discussion documents. I'm a little suspicious of why one would want to erase the specificity of any party who "identifies" with either the "left" or the "right": in the case of SF, they have identified with socialist/ marxist politics for quite a while now.

I just don't see what's to be gained by erasing that specificity?

lucernarian

I think its saddening that certain people brand a political party (in this case Sinn Féin) as "Left" or "Right". Peoples' ideas, beliefs, feelings, ideals etc. are too complex to use a two-dimensional view on their opinions and I can't see how everyone's political views can be plotted on a scale of varying degrees of left or right. Has anyone thought of a "Far Centre" point of view?

I know it sounds wierd and/or confusing but think about it please

Thats all:cool:

dark_knight_ire

Originally posted by David-[RLD]-

Sinn Féin are a political party, and a popular political party at that. Face reality. They're pro-Agreement and are one of the foundations of the Peace Process. "Oh but they have links to the IRA!!" So what? Everyone has links to some form of criminal activity in one way or another. Doesn't necessarily mean that Sinn Féin go out when they're not in suits and ties and shoot people. What's that I hear? Ten-year-long ceasefire? Thought so.

See i have problems to this kind of logic, You say sinn fein have links to the IRA of course we all know this but how can they be on ceasefire, they are most clearly not. Shooting gardai, knocking off bands and illegal arms deals as well as being a strong player in the irish drugs trade.

Remember all the Sinn Fein posters think about it out of every 10 you saw one or two of them were probably funded out of some form of criminal activity.

Another point you made the so what if they have a link thing. NO GOVERNMENT can have a link to a criminal group it stands in the face of the constitution and what irish men and woman fought to achive.

Look at the poll most of you would not vote for tem but then not all would vote FF so we have to split that, very possible they could win a vote, if that every happened i could take comfort in knowing they would not last long before we would rise against them

monument

Originally posted by To_be_confirmed
I think its saddening that certain people brand a political party (in this case Sinn Féin) as "Left" or "Right". Peoples' ideas, beliefs, feelings, ideals etc. are too complex to use a two-dimensional view on their opinions and I can't see how everyone's political views can be plotted on a scale of varying degrees of left or right. Has anyone thought of a "Far Centre" point of view?

I know it sounds wierd and/or confusing but think about it please

Thats all:cool:

Welcome to The Political Compass.

There's abundant evidence for the need of it. The old one-dimensional categories of 'right' and 'left' , established for the seating arrangement of the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's complex political landscape. For example, who are the 'conservatives' in today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers who have adopted the right-wing views of conservatives like Margaret Thatcher ?

For more SEE http://www.politicalcompass.org/ - Do the test and *then* read the analysis.

bus77

Perhaps the original anti treaty people/founders of Sinn Fien were a mixture of Faciats and Communists.
The complete ignoring of the need to meet the British half way and the subsequent setting up of Sinn Fein with its policys of ingorance of the current Irish State (and Socilism) does sugest a sort of "my way or the highway" almost Faciat attitude of it's founding members.

Any cause where the goal is a new state will attract/contain members who want to do things "their way". Maybe you could look at the anti treaty people/founders of Sinn Fein and say that was them?

But Republican partys where the enemy is not percived to be the Goverment Itself but a Foreign power useually form In a differnt way to others. Where Communist and Facist useually gather together a group of like minded individuals where the partys sole purpose is to take power.

In Irish Republicanism the party is useually seen as not only a group ready to take power but also "another tool in the toolbox" for the cause, a face sitting at a table ready to negotiate. Therefore people dont nessisarily get chosen for their polictical outlook but instead get chosen for their precived "abilty" to do the job.

I suspect the original founders of Sinn Fein were a mixture of Communist and almost Facist types who held out hope of one day returning to take power, but after so many years the party has (I hope) been repopulated with a "mixed bag" once again.

Sleepy

Originally posted by Hagar
Dev founded Fianna Fáil not Sinn Féin.

No sh|t sherlock, but he may as well have because his party have opened the door to the terrorists.

Originally posted by monument
How SF are 'doing it', why comments from Michael McDowell (like 'Sleepy' here) are helping them, and more...

So, FF are incompetent, SF are good tacticians and know how to capitalise on the governments failings, what's new in that?

By and large, the governments handling of the economy wasn't all that bad. It was what they did with their tax revenues (and their refusal to tax the rich) that made a balls of things. Just because Fianna Fail are corrupt and incompetent, doesn't make it right to allow murderers take seats in government. Nor does it make it right to throw away economic success.

Until a new political party is created or Fianna Gael learn how to become effective, SF will continue to poll well and this country will sink itself further into ruin under Fianna Fail as we lose all credibility on the world stage by electing killers.

monument

Originally posted by bus77
Perhaps the original anti treaty people/founders of Sinn Fien were a mixture of Faciats and Communists.
The complete ignoring of the need to meet the British half way and the subsequent setting up of Sinn Fein with its policys of ingorance of the current Irish State (and Socilism) does sugest a sort of "my way or the highway" almost Faciat attitude of it's founding members.

Perhaps they did not like the idea of letting the people in the north down?

sceptre

Originally posted by bus77
Perhaps the original anti treaty people/founders of Sinn Fien

The guy generally recognised as the "founder" of Sinn Fein (Arthur Griffith) was pro-Treaty.

Actually prior to that he was pro-dual monarchy along the lines of Austria-Hungary - it was key to his early writings (including The Resurrection of Hungary) that the Act of Union was illegal and the constitutional documents of 1782 were still in place.

Sleepy

Originally posted by monument
Perhaps they did not like the idea of letting the people in the north down?

Accept reality. There was/is/never will be an ideal solution to the northern problem. A 32 county Ireland is an unattainable pipe dream as even if the Irish government were stupid enough to take it off the Brits' hands we couldn't afford to run it. What part of this don't Sinn Fein understand?

bus77

Originally posted by monument
Perhaps they did not like the idea of letting the people in the north down?

Them too, Im not sugesting It didnt contain members that had those views. But I think the people writing the original polocies were party made up of disafected Communist types from down here.

bus77

Originally posted by Sleepy
Accept reality. There was/is/never will be an ideal solution to the northern problem. A 32 county Ireland is an unattainable pipe dream as even if the Irish government were stupid enough to take it off the Brits' hands we couldn't afford to run it. What part of this don't Sinn Fein understand?

You could say that making the north a self governed semi indepandant state would be/is a solution. What part of this do the Unionts not understand?

The Corinthian

Originally posted by earwicker
My own position is that since they in practice identify themselves as "leftie," this practical identification informs my assessment of the party and my reading of its discussion documents. I'm a little suspicious of why one would want to erase the specificity of any party who "identifies" with either the "left" or the "right": in the case of SF, they have identified with socialist/ marxist politics for quite a while now.

Most communist States refer (or referred) to themselves as People’s Democratic Republics. It takes little examination of such States to realise that they can call themselves democratic if they wish, but that hardly makes it true. The same would apply to any political organisation, and so SF can call themselves Socialist, Marxist or Thatcherite if it takes their fancy, but that hardly makes it true either.

Even if a label were broadly accurate there’s a wide range of variation even between different groups that would apparently share the same philosophy - Trotskyites would be radically different to Stalinists or Social Democrats. The Italian PNF would have differed greatly from that of Germany’s Nazi party or even Chile’s quasi-Fascist system under Pinochet. Indeed, no two variations of any political ideology will actually match, and many will go further borrow aspects of other, often opposed, ideologies as they see fit.

So when we look at an organisation like SF, we should examine not if there is an exact fit or even what it claims to be, but where it shares most similarities - what it is de facto rather than de jure. Broadly speaking this would probably place SF as a ‘flavour’ or variation of Fascism, if you will, as it is closest to that ideological family than any other, regardless of what labels it chooses to market itself with.

Sleepy

Originally posted by bus77
You could say that making the north a self governed semi indepandant state would be/is a solution. What part of this do the Unionts not understand?

I would agree with you entirely on this point. Unfortunately, large sections of the Unionist community are just as stubborn about giving up violence as the same sections of the Republican community. My own solution to this would be to lock all these people into a battle arena and let them kill each other off with any survivors being gassed. Then, when all those that want/create the violence are dead, the remainder can set about rebuilding Northern Ireland as an independant state.

ecksor

Ahh, and here was me thinking that you didn't have a realistic alternative solution :rolleyes: