What Irish political party would you like to see disappear and why?

Sgt. Sensible

oscarBravo wrote:

I've got an oblique sense of humour.

Or else maybe you think that either there's no such thing as exclusive schools in lovely egalitarian ireland or else that surely everyone can fork out 4k a year or whatever it is to send their kids to Gonzaga.

oscarBravo

Sgt. Sensible wrote:

Or else maybe you think that either there's no such thing as exclusive schools in lovely egalitarian ireland or else that surely everyone can fork out 4k a year or whatever it is to send their kids to Gonzaga.

No, I don't think any of the above.

Sgt. Sensible

oscarBravo wrote:

No, I don't think any of the above.

Are you ever going to get around to expressing an actual opinion?

oscarBravo

Sgt. Sensible wrote:

Are you ever going to get around to expressing an actual opinion?

Me? Heavens, no. I think it's time we both got back on topic, don't you?

Sgt. Sensible

oscarBravo wrote:

Me? Heavens, no. I think it's time we both got back on topic, don't you?

Yes, why not. Well, all Irish parties are terrible in their own drab ways, but I don't really see why the OP has chosen to pick on the Swappies as they're such an ineffectual non-entity.

Jackie laughlin

Ah God, Aidan, you're not wheeling out the "rising tide will lift all boats" argument? In other words you want us to take seriously the proposition that as long as the poorest of the poor gain a marginal improvement, the richest of the rich can gain unimaginable wealth. Frankly, anyone with a shred of decency accepts that poverty is relative and not absolute.

Neo-liberalism (and its PD) adherents ensure that wealth accrues to those who do NOT work and certainly don't any addition to their ludicrous wealth.

Hurin and IllegalHB,
I write fuly referenced pieces for journals and I generally refuse to give references in conversation. My input here is conversation. However, I'll make an exception this once. See Harvey, D. A Brief History of NeoLiberalism (Oxford University Press, 2005) ISBN 0-19-928326-5.

I consider it rude to behave like an arrogant teacher, scribbling "source" rather than being constructive.

Jackie laughlin

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Ah God, Aidan, you're not wheeling out the "rising tide will lift all boats" argument? In other words you want us to take seriously the proposition that as long as the poorest of the poor gain a marginal improvement, the richest of the rich can gain unimaginable wealth. Frankly, anyone with a shred of decency accepts that poverty is relative and not absolute.

Neo-liberalism (and its PD) adherents ensure that wealth accrues to those who do NOT work and certainly don't any addition to their ludicrous wealth.

Hurin and IllegalHB,
I write fuly referenced pieces for journals and I generally refuse to give references in conversation. My input here is conversation. However, I'll make an exception this once. See Harvey, D. A Brief History of NeoLiberalism (Oxford University Press, 2005) ISBN 0-19-928326-5.

I consider it rude to behave like an arrogant teacher, scribbling "source" rather than being constructive.

Thank you for making an exception. If someone posts something as fact that isn't common knowledge, I like to know where they're getting it from. I find getting a source for what you're saying more constructive, than trying to wean information from you the course of maybe 15 posts or so.

Aidan1

In other words you want us to take seriously the proposition that as long as the poorest of the poor gain a marginal improvement, the richest of the rich can gain unimaginable wealth.

Unimaginable wealth, the poorest of the poor? Hyperbole much? Jackie, the figures for Ireland alone disprove Have a look at the figures for Ireland, most people have seen a dramatic rise in the their living standards. The fact that some have seen a more radical increase leads to the relativities looking out of shape when it comes to international comparisons. Would you really stymy the growth experienced by the vast majority of the population, just to serve an obsolete ideology. Note also, btw, full employment.

Frankly, anyone with a shred of decency accepts that poverty is relative and not absolute.

What has decency got to do with anything? Poverty is an absolute, and can be measured asuch. Gini coefficients and other measures of income distribution have their place, but on a practical level, there has to be a limit to what 'poverty' can be defined as. If I live in a community/state whatever where everyone lives in mansions and drives Ferraris, does that mean that I am 'owed' a mansion and Ferrari by the state? Because relatively speaking, I'm poor, even though I may only drive a BMW.

The intro to the David Harvey book is available here;

http://www.oup.co.uk/pdf/0-19-928326-5.pdf

For those of you who don't know of him, he's one of Americas finest cultural geographers, and has written some of the standard texts on post modernism ("Time Space Compression and the Post Modern Condition" being a classic). Great writing, but always a little low on facts and very strong on opinion. Unfortunately also, he's flag waving socialist, which means that he can hardly be said to be an uninterested observer. To be fair, he makes no claim to be one either, being quite open in his objectives and his bias.

ta

Jackie laughlin

IllegalHB,
I'm sorry if I appeared rude.

Aidan,
Why is Harvey a "flag waving" socialist? Like me he's a socialist. He argues. Do you fancy being called a "flag waving" neo-liberal?

All poverty indecies are political. (Indeed almost every utterance is political.) When I say that poverty is a relative concept I adopt an ideological/moral standpoint. When you say that poverty is absolute, you adopt a different ideological/moral standpoint.

Ireland has become an increasingly unequal society. Extreme inequality is not necessary for economic growth. Again, Harvey argues that the opposite is true.

Are you entirely serious when you ask, "What's decency got to do with it"? Is there no disparity in wealth that would give you pause for thought?

Aidan1

I used the phrase 'flag waving' to describe Harvey because he himself puts his own ideology at the forefront of what he argues. In other words, rather than just being 'an academic', he regularly describes himself as a 'Marxist Geographer', complete with associated moral responsibilities to explore the effects of capitalism. It lies at the core of his work, and he proclaims this at every opportunity.

It wasn't a slur on my behalf, I respect him for his honesty, and he really is a brilliant commentator on a purely 'academic' basis. He wouldn't be my first choice of authority on economic policy or even economic geography (of either stripe) though.

All poverty indecies are political

Of course they are. Even the idea of having them is a political statement. However, like my extreme example, and your question (not answer, notably) shows, all we are actually arguing about is the extent of state intervention in supporting those lower earners, not the issue in and of itself. In other words, we both implicitly accept that this is a 'bidding' argument (how much ...), rather than a discussion of fundamentals (why should we ...). Of course I accept the idea of social welfare, and state supports for lower earners through other means (such as state aided medical care, education etc). I just happen to believe that (a) freedom of choice and (b) a rational discussion on the uses to which public money is put, can co exist with such a system. The 'Maud Flanders Approach' to public policy is not a sound basis for decision making.

jjbrien

There are about 10 fringde parties in Ireland that need to go. Thier ideas are dumb or outdated here is what I think should go:

Christian Solidarity Party

Irish Republican Socialist Movement this not the main Solcisit Party who Joe Higgens is a member of

Muintir na hEireann = Irish pro-family, pro-life political party, registered with the Clerk of the Dail in 1995.

Socialist Workers' Party again this not the main Solcisit Party who Joe Higgens is a member of

The Workers' Party of Ireland

Most of these socilist parties have outdated ideas they should all regound and join the main socilist party so they could get more votes as it stands they dont get votes.

The Christian/pro life parties have no grounds in Irish socity today. They dont even take into account if a womans life is in danger becasue of a pregancy so deny her an abortion. Thier ideas are outdated escecially all a woman has to do is go to belfast for an abortion.

Jackie laughlin

Jackie laughlin wrote:

IllegalHB,
I'm sorry if I appeared rude.

Ha, no worries. The internet lacks context, people often give off/get the wrong impression

jjbrien

jjbrien wrote:

There are about 10 fringde parties in Ireland that need to go. Thier ideas are dumb or outdated here is what I think should go:

Christian Solidarity Party

Irish Republican Socialist Movement this not the main Solcisit Party who Joe Higgens is a member of

Muintir na hEireann = Irish pro-family, pro-life political party, registered with the Clerk of the Dail in 1995.

Socialist Workers' Party again this not the main Solcisit Party who Joe Higgens is a member of

The Workers' Party of Ireland

Most of these socilist parties have outdated ideas they should all regound and join the main socilist party so they could get more votes as it stands they dont get votes.

The Christian/pro life parties have no grounds in Irish socity today. They dont even take into account if a womans life is in danger becasue of a pregancy so deny her an abortion. Thier ideas are outdated escecially all a woman has to do is go to belfast for an abortion.

I find it unsettling that people think small minority parties need to go, just because people don't agree with them, or think their ideas are outdated.

Moorsy

Diorraing wrote:

Quit living in the past! FF were criminals once.

Which past are you talking about. The civil war past or the 'brown envelope' past?

'Thegoth' your exactly the reason parties like the pd's should be expelled and shows the insidious crassness which right wing parties reek of.

People who sit on their asses?? You mean socially deprived people, handicapped people, elderly people. These are the people the pd's who wish to take money from. If you agree with the pd's do you think there should be a higher rate of tax for high earners??

You also said you work in health care and then in it, do you have 2 jobs or is there an IT Health care sector in Ireland??

To the author of this tread said its strange that well off middle class people can be socialist. Your joking comrade ; ), Che was from a rich middle class family he studied medicine in university! Just because a person comes form a well off background doesn't me her or she can't feel compassion for the abhorrent treatment of certain sectors of society and want to act on there behalf where they cannot act.

Jackie laughlin

Aidan,
Harvey is just an ordinary, honest man. His political position is up front. I hope that I'm like him in this respect. Everyone should state their ideological position. I'm never sure if it's just stupidity or downright dishonesty when people say that they are "realistic" or not burdened with ideology.

I think we are arguing about more than the extent of state intervention. We are arguing the old question of inequality.

Freedom of choice and rational discussion are tightly linked. We don't have sufficient discussion. We hear almost no popular (media) criticism of the moral and economic failures of neo-liberalism. An old fashioned liberal would be appalled at the dominance of one point of view. I can't recall when I last heard a socialist economist on radio or TV. Perhaps a dutiful producer can't find one as I don't know of anyone teaching economics in our universities who is remotely iconoclastic.

I don't understand "the Maud Flanders Approach".

FTA69

I'd like to see the other parties go so mad Republican criminal, bombing terroristic, baby-eating, piggy-bank stealing, balloon-bursting, shaven headed, tracksuit wearing, fascist maniacs like me can put them all in labour camps.

In all fairness lads, the nonsense directed at Republicans here is simply unreal, I've read some sh*t in my time but half the posters here would upstage Willie Frazer with their vitriol.

First of all Sinn Féin is not a "front for criminals", we are the third largest party in Ireland and we have a third of a million people voting for us, a mandate which has increased in every election since 1986. By the way, since so many people here claim that the IRA is involved in "crime" I'd love to hear their rationale behind it, especially considering that organisation has verifiably put all arms beyond use and stood down from a military footing.

jjbrien

FTA69 wrote:

I'd like to see the other parties go so mad Republican criminal, bombing terroristic, baby-eating, piggy-bank stealing, balloon-bursting, shaven headed, tracksuit wearing, fascist maniacs like me can put them all in labour camps.

In all fairness lads, the nonsense directed at Republicans here is simply unreal, I've read some sh*t in my time but half the posters here would upstage Willie Frazer with their vitriol.

First of all Sinn Féin is not a "front for criminals", we are the third largest party in Ireland and we have a third of a million people voting for us, a mandate which has increased in every election since 1986. By the way, since so many people here claim that the IRA is involved in "crime" I'd love to hear their rationale behind it, especially considering that organisation has verifiably put all arms beyond use and stood down from a military footing.

Firstly SF is not the 3rd biggest party in the Republic of Ireland maybe in the north but not down here. Labour is the 3rd biggest parrt in the Republic ahead of them are FF and FG.

Secondly several members of the heads of SF were leading IRA men everybody knows that SF is just the political arm of the provos. It was very easy for the provos to put their arms beyond reach and decomission when SF wanted to get into power. The provos are involved for a large part in criminal acities in the north and the boarder counties.

FTA69

Firstly SF is not the 3rd biggest party in the Republic of Ireland maybe in the north but not down here. Labour is the 3rd biggest parrt in the Republic ahead of them are FF and FG.

Sinn Féin is the largest party in Ireland, Ireland being the 32 counties. Would you like me to list them for you?

Secondly several members of the heads of SF were leading IRA men

Your point being? The key word there is "were", Seán Lemass and Pat Rabbitte were also connected to illegal organisations during their political tenure.

knows that SF is just the political arm of the provos.

You mean the IRA who has put all its arms beyond use and has stepped away from the scene?

The provos are involved for a large part in criminal acities in the north and the boarder counties.

Says who? Name me one reputable source who is saying the IRA is involved in crime.

Diogenes

FTA69 wrote:

First of all Sinn Féin is not a "front for criminals", we are the third largest party in Ireland and we have a third of a million people voting for us, a mandate which has increased in every election since 1986.

Er as another poster pointed out you are in no way the third largest party in ireland.

By the way, since so many people here claim that the IRA is involved in "crime" I'd love to hear their rationale behind it, especially considering that organisation has verifiably put all arms beyond use and stood down from a military footing.

It still exists though, tell us why does the IRA still exist.

Aidan1

Freedom of choice and rational discussion are tightly linked. We don't have sufficient discussion.

No argument on that, the quality of polictical (and economic) debate here (in Ireland) is very poor.

I can't recall when I last heard a socialist economist on radio or TV.

You mean apart from George 'Chicken licken' Lee?

Perhaps because qualified economists don't tend to be socialists per se? I know thats a snide aside, but theres a grain of truth therein. Most 'socialists' tend to be concerned more with the human effects of 'capitalism', rather than gaining a mechanistic or pseudo scientfic understanding of how it operates, hence the number that gravitate to 'serious' economics is minimal. Even those 'leftist' economists rarely tend to be socialist - Amartya Sen or Galbraith for example.

Harvey, for example, is no economist, his area is cultural geography. Unfortunately, his ideological basis leads him to use a number of assumptions in his pursuit of said theory, assumptions that may or may not be verifiable in a scientific sense (or rather, that no professsional economist would admit to)

Perhaps a dutiful producer can't find one as I don't know of anyone teaching economics in our universities who is remotely iconoclastic.

A good few are iconoclastic, in my limited exposure, just not in the way you'd like!

I don't understand "the Maud Flanders Approach

".

A hysterical "Won't some one please, think of the children!"

Saruman

Sinn feinn.... they pretend to be republican but are actually socialists.

Cronus333

jjbrien wrote:

Firstly SF is not the 3rd biggest party in the Republic of Ireland maybe in the north but not down here. Labour is the 3rd biggest parrt in the Republic ahead of them are FF and FG.

Not only that in dail they are the, wait for it, the 6th largest party. Thats quite a way from third.

Diogenes

Saruman wrote:

Sinn feinn.... they pretend to be republican but are actually socialists.

The opposite is true, SF was a socialist party in the 60s before the troubles kicked off, ardent republicanism drove it through the troubles but it's kept a veneer of socialism. Nowdays they thrive of a pretense of socialism, but their actions when they have power expose their policies as neo libertism, one needs to look at how they claim to be anti bin charges in Dublin yet supported bin charges in sligo, and their privatisation of hospitials in the north.

Socialist me arse.

FTA69

Er as another poster pointed out you are in no way the third largest party in ireland.

Er, and as I pointed out in the 32 Counties of Ireland Sinn Féin is the third largest political party, "Ireland" doesn't stop at the Louth border. I am not claiming we are the third largest party in the 26 Counties, rather Ireland as a whole, is that really that hard to fathom?

It still exists though, tell us why does the IRA still exist.

Because obviously the IRA, and the communities in which it is supported, feels the need for the IRA to remain in existance. Besides that is not the issue considering they are unarmed and not involved in the political process.

The opposite is true, SF was a socialist party in the 60s before the troubles kicked off,

Depends on your definition of Socialist, some would argue that failing to challenge British repression in the north was not socialist, and that is probably the reason why the Stickies have now ceased to be a political force.

Nowdays they thrive of a pretense of socialism, but their actions when they have power expose their policies as neo libertism, one needs to look at how they claim to be anti bin charges in Dublin yet supported bin charges in sligo, and their privatisation of hospitials in the north.

What simplistic nonsense, Sinn Féin were anti-bin charges all over the country, unfortunately in a movement as large as ours there will always be some black sheep. Regarding the assembly, obviously you would have realised that the Assembly had no fundraising powers and as such had to work with PPPs (albeit begrudgingly), it was either that or have no schools etc. Of course the alternative would have been collapse the Assembly yadda yadda yadda, but that would ahrdly have been the best course of action.

oscarBravo

FTA69 wrote:

Er, and as I pointed out in the 32 Counties of Ireland Sinn Féin is the third largest political party, "Ireland" doesn't stop at the Louth border. I am not claiming we are the third largest party in the 26 Counties, rather Ireland as a whole, is that really that hard to fathom?

Given that the term is ambiguous, it may have been helpful to clarify with "on the island of Ireland".

What metric do you use to measure the "size" of a party?

FTA69 wrote:

Because obviously the IRA, and the communities in which it is supported, feels the need for the IRA to remain in existance. Besides that is not the issue considering they are unarmed and not involved in the political process.

Can you explain why the communities feel the need for a disarmed IRA to remain in existance?

FTA69 wrote:

What simplistic nonsense, Sinn Féin were anti-bin charges all over the country, unfortunately in a movement as large as ours there will always be some black sheep.

Were the Sligo councillors disciplined for deviating from the party line?

FTA69

Given that the term is ambiguous, it may have been helpful to clarify with "on the island of Ireland".

If you read my earlier post you would have seen me say:

"Sinn Féin is the largest party in Ireland, Ireland being the 32 counties."

What metric do you use to measure the "size" of a party?

The amount of people who vote for it, in which case I probably should have used the word "popular", it is only semantical.

Can you explain why the communities feel the need for a disarmed IRA to remain in existance?

Reassurance, I suppose. You are forgeting that the Provisional IRA comes from a community steeped in the concept of self-defence.

Were the Sligo councillors disciplined for deviating from the party line?

It is not up to me to comment on internal matters, but the matter was dealt with.

oscarBravo

FTA69 wrote:

If you read my earlier post you would have seen me say:

"Sinn Féin is the largest party in Ireland, Ireland being the 32 counties."

In clarification to your original unclear point, yes.

FTA69 wrote:

The amount of people who vote for it, in which case I probably should have used the word "popular", it is only semantical.

First-preference votes? Transfers? Dáil or local authority?

It seems to me the popularity of a party is pretty well represented by the number of seats they hold, given a STV electoral system.

FTA69 wrote:

Reassurance, I suppose. You are forgeting that the Provisional IRA comes from a community steeped in the concept of self-defence.

I'm not forgetting that at all. I'm wondering why, to coin a metaphor, anyone would keep a stuffed and mounted guard dog in their house for reassurance.

Maybe they know something we don't.

Diogenes

FTA69 wrote:

Er, and as I pointed out in the 32 Counties of Ireland Sinn Féin is the third largest political party, "Ireland" doesn't stop at the Louth border. I am not claiming we are the third largest party in the 26 Counties, rather Ireland as a whole, is that really that hard to fathom?

What? Are you just counting the number of seats SF have in both assemblies and coming up with a number? How exactly does your maths work?

Because obviously the IRA, and the communities in which it is supported, feels the need for the IRA to remain in existance. Besides that is not the issue considering they are unarmed and not involved in the political process.

So let me get this straight, SF's paramilitary wing still exists as an organisation and you think it's acceptable for the "third largest" party in Ireland to have it's own army?

Depends on your definition of Socialist, some would argue that failing to challenge British repression in the north was not socialist, and that is probably the reason why the Stickies have now ceased to be a political force.

What weak soup. Sounds like the kind of political backpeddling SF use to justify this nonsense.

What simplistic nonsense, Sinn Féin were anti-bin charges all over the country, unfortunately in a movement as large as ours there will always be some black sheep.

So let me get this straight SF are totally anti bin charges except when they're in a position to do something about it, at which point they vote for them. Were the SF CC's who voted for the charges ejected from the party?

Regarding the assembly, obviously you would have realised that the Assembly had no fundraising powers and as such had to work with PPPs (albeit begrudgingly), it was either that or have no schools etc. Of course the alternative would have been collapse the Assembly yadda yadda yadda, but that would ahrdly have been the best course of action.

Ah yes the praticalities, see SF like to srut that they are a left wing progressive party, yet when they're in power here are two examples of them voting in a totally un socialist manner.

FTA69

Oscar,

In clarification to your original unclear point, yes.

I wouldn't term it unclear, I said Ireland, meaning the whole of Ireland. You know well I'm a Republican so what else would I mean?

First-preference votes? Transfers? Dáil or local authority?

It seems to me the popularity of a party is pretty well represented by the number of seats they hold, given a STV electoral system.

Not necessarily, for instance we have roughly 10% of the vote in the south while the PDs have 2%, yet they have 8 seats and we have 5. We still get more votes than them though.

I'm not forgetting that at all. I'm wondering why, to coin a metaphor, anyone would keep a stuffed and mounted guard dog in their house for reassurance.

Because Republicans and IRA ex-prisoners play a valuable role within Republican communities, ie defusing trouble at interface areas etc.

Diogenes,

What? Are you just counting the number of seats SF have in both assemblies and coming up with a number? How exactly does your maths work?

Counting first preference votes in the two most recent elections in the north and south I believe.

So let me get this straight, SF's paramilitary wing still exists as an organisation and you think it's acceptable for the "third largest" party in Ireland to have it's own army?

It's not our "military wing", it its own organisation with its own command structure and membership, it makes its own decisions and is presided over by its own Council, Executive and is answerable to a General Army Convention of IRA Volunteers. That having been said we do have a link with them but by no means are we one and the same.

What weak soup. Sounds like the kind of political backpeddling SF use to justify this nonsense.

Not really, the only "weak" argument I see is someone trying to portray the 1969 split as a left-right divide which was clearly not the case.

So let me get this straight SF are totally anti bin charges except when they're in a position to do something about it, at which point they vote for them. Were the SF CC's who voted for the charges ejected from the party?

As I said, the matter was dealt with. Ejection is not the only means of party discipline is it?

Ah yes the praticalities, see SF like to srut that they are a left wing progressive party, yet when they're in power here are two examples of them voting in a totally un socialist manner.

As I said the Assembly does not have fundraising powers, what would you have done?