What can we do?

John R

Sleepy wrote: »

I can't abide by either of the larger parties and there's no point to the smaller ones.

You decide that a party has not enough support to get elected so you won't support them. I firmly believe that it is just that thought process that ensures things will never change.

The sad thing is that in Irish politics it only takes a relatively small shift in voting patterns to completely change the make-up of governments. There are now regularly a larger number of people who don't vote in elections than the number who vote for the most popular party.



Your simplistic reasons for dismissing each and every significant party are rubbish IMO. Of course you are not going to get a perfect fit for your views but the one line descriptions you gave earlier tells me you have not really researched any of them properly.

FFS if Ian Paisley and Martin McGuinness can work together enough to form a (sort of) working government I refuse to believe you cannot find a political party in Ireland that you are in general agreement with about most major issues.

Perhaps the first step is to figure out exactly where you stand on the major issues because some of the things you have posted in this thread are contradictory.

djpbarry

Sleepy wrote: »

djpbarry - how would you propose having any influence without being a member of a party? I see the amnesty link in your sig, am I to surmise you feel that lobby groups are a better way of influencing politics than one's vote? I'd agree to a certain extent, however, in the political climate I've grown up with and live with in Ireland, the lobby groups that are listened to by Irish governments don't tend to be as noble of purpose as Amnesty.

Well, I don't really think it has to be one or the other. I think lobby groups are a useful tool, but I take your point that the Irish government tends to pick and choose which ones they want to listen to and which ones they want to ignore.

What I was really trying to say is that I don't feel it is absolutely necessary to affiliate oneself with one particular party to have an influence. I find that TD's are quite receptive to my communications, whether I am speaking for myself or on behalf of a larger organisation, e.g. Amnesty. At the end of the day, these guys just want to get re-elected and they'll do whatever they can to keep their constituents happy so as to meet that end.

Jackie laughlin wrote: »

Djp,
Politics by pressure group is pluralism/polyarchy and favours the strong over the weak. Those with sufficient funds to campaign, win.

I would say that is more so in the case of political parties than of NGO's. Lobby groups exist, for the most part (there are exceptions, I grant you), to provide a voice for the weak.

Catari Jaguar

Sleepy wrote: »

It's an oft-commented on fact that the Irish are a great race for grumbling about the state of the nation whilst doing nothing to improve things. What I'd like to throw up for discussion is how we could go about making changes in this country.

Personally, I couldn't align myself to any of the existing political parties as I see them all as being full of the type of people who are great at spouting rhetoric and spin whilst lacking in any ability to project manage, organise, direct or lead.

We get a vote evey few years but that's of little use in a country where most people vote for local reasons rather than national policies.

Starting a political party requires money, influence or charisma beyond that of the ordinary individual.

So, what options are left for the ordinary person that wants to positively influence the country?

Protest march outside Dail
Strike
Peaceful and maybe not so peaceful protest
Call up radio/media to get the little people heard
Write letters to newspapers
Write letters to TDs. Call into their office with a bunch of people and DEMAND what you want.
VOTE ... AGAINST FF
Boycott things you don't want
Refuse to do things
Say, you don't like something... how about YOU DO SOMETHING.

All these Metro letters "I'm disgusted cos no one gave up their seat for an oul one..." Well, letter writer, why didn't you say "Hey, You lazy ignorant feckers, have some manners and give up your seat? And you, scumbag in the corner, stop fcukn smoking! You're pissing me off"

COWARDS

Look at France compared to Ireland or the other red blooded countries like Italy or Spain. When they have a problem, you know about it. Ireland is a poxy arse, tiny country full of lazy people who just go with the flow, backseat drivers, all talk and no action.

Ireland: Bus strike, people grumble and offer no support. Blame the drivers and not the government. It's all forgotten in a week.

France: Bus Strike. Drivers. ALL civil servants inc. teachers/ nurses go on strike with them. That oughta fcuk up that gov. plans.

Stupid Irish.

nesf

Lil Kitten wrote: »

Ireland: Bus strike, people grumble and offer no support. Blame the drivers and not the government. It's all forgotten in a week.

France: Bus Strike. Drivers. ALL civil servants inc. teachers/ nurses go on strike with them. That oughta fcuk up that gov. plans.

You think this is a good thing?

Catari Jaguar

Yes, they were striking for a reason.

nesf

So it's a good thing that certain vested interests can force the elected government of a country into doing things a certain way despite them representing a small fraction of the population?

Sonnenblumen

Mordeth wrote: »

revolution?

What we need more hamsters?

DrumSteve

Lil Kitten wrote: »

Ireland: Bus strike, people grumble and offer no support. Blame the drivers and not the government. It's all forgotten in a week.

France: Bus Strike. Drivers. ALL civil servants inc. teachers/ nurses go on strike with them. That oughta fcuk up that gov. plans.

Stupid Irish.

well i think the french had a bit of a better reason...

they werent complaining cos they had to take their cup of tea somewhere else.

as someone who uses dublin bus every day and has to put up with drivers who turn up at times they feel like... well i dont have much sympathy for them.

nesf

DrumSteve wrote: »

well i think the french had a bit of a better reason...

they werent complaining cos they had to take their cup of tea somewhere else.

as someone who uses dublin bus every day and has to put up with drivers who turn up at times they feel like... well i dont have much sympathy for them.

This time they were striking over the special treatment they got being removed. Certain public servants get to retire early on full benefit versus the rest of the public and private sector.*

*I know I'm simplifying here.

lostexpectation

sleepy describe yourself in 10 words, not your politics but ,who you are, what you do,what you in to etc...

DrumSteve

nesf wrote: »

This time they were striking over the special treatment they got being removed. Certain public servants get to retire early on full benefit versus the rest of the public and private sector.*

*I know I'm simplifying here.

i know but its a bit different from your break being moved to somewhere else isnt it...

nesf

DrumSteve wrote: »

i know but its a bit different from your break being moved to somewhere else isnt it...

It's at a similar level of "why on earth would these people expect and get public support" for me tbh.

Sleepy

lostexpectation wrote: »

sleepy describe yourself in 10 words, not your politics but ,who you are, what you do,what you in to etc...

Why?

Very difficult to define anyone in just ten words.

Sleepy

Jackie laughlin wrote: »

Sleepy,
When you say that "the state owes each citizen a proper education, proper healthcare, safety (from crime, fire etc. as well as social support should they fall on hard times)", it is contradictory then to say "people are responsible for their own actions, prosperity and success in life." OK, you did qualify with "ultimately". I would say that any person's success or prosperity is determined by the collective effort of others. Would you limit state involvement to education, health and safety?

Pretty much. I disagree that it's contradictory to say that people are ultimately responsible for their own actions, prosperity and success in life. Once we all have the same entitlements (and access to) educations, healthcare and safety success will (mainly) depend on one's own actions. Sure, the offspring of the rich will have it easier than some but isn't that what most people want for their offspring and work towards? I don't believe in 'big government' where people expect the state to cater for them their entire lives.

College applicants were interviewed by some colleges until it became too slow and costly. I don't know that it was any fairer or if the selections were any better. My view is that everyone attaining a university entrance standard should have the opportunity to take a liberal humanities degree and that places on courses with limited availability should be allocated by lottery. However, the basic standard would need attention as many of those now reaching 3rd level are virtually illiterate.

While that seems very equitable, I believe in rewarding talent and hard work so I do believe performance at secondary school should have some bearing on the allocation of limited availability courses. I'd still like to see some degree of suitability testing brought in for such vocational subjects as medecine, teaching, nursing etc. as our current system takes no account of such things (i.e. you can have doctors with no bedside manner or a fear of the sight of blood or teachers who only want the job for the cushy holidays).

Public representatives are not afforded liberties for which the rest of us would be jailed. The problem is that a small number of corrupt politicians have not broken any law or cannot be proven to have broken the law. Corruption should be more liberally defined and be punished harshly; the corrupt and the corrupters should be imprisoned.

Are you telling me you could drive a car down the wrong side of a motorway whilst plastered and not face jail time? I don't see the ordinary person getting away as leniantly as certain people for that kind of behaviour. It appears however that this is something we agree with on principle but disagree on the current state of affairs.

Capital punishment is barbaric.

I'm afraid I disagree. Some peoples actions warrant them undeserving of the right to life imho. Were it not for the economic problems of imposing such law (i.e. costing more to fry them than lock them up in perpetuity) I'd be all for capital punishment. It really is another conversation however.

Bureaucracy is our guarantee of equal and fair treatment by the state.

How? We have excessive bureaucracy right now and there certainly isn't an excess of equality of treatment by the state in this country. It's not something we fare too badly on in comparison to many places but we've a LONG way to go before we can say we've achieved it. Show me the details of virtually any public sector system in Ireland and I'll show you it's inefficiencies (and in many cases how to rectify these).

There is certainly nothing wrong with cultural nationalism.

It's my considered opinion that one should be identified by one's actions rather than where one was born.

ambro25

Lil Kitten wrote: »

Yes, they were striking for a reason.

Where strikes and France are concerned, that's a magnificent oxymoron, I'm afraid

It will not happen here for many reasons:

(i) the civil service hasn't got the means to paralyse to the same extent, in terms of sectors covered and numbers

(ii) unions (and 'para-unions', e.g. motorists organisations, consumer groups, etc.) are not organised/concerted enough to coordinate

(iii) I must admit that yes, I find the 'Irish apathy' to be about as diametrically opposed to the FR/IT/ES 'latin excesses' as can be

(but on this last point, I'm quick to add that it's not necessarily "a bad thing", but more like a cultural trait - same as other northern european regions/nations really)

So, what can be done? Nothing, just enjoy the ride, vote whenever you can, talk to your TDs, and let democracy take care of itself.

djpbarry

Sleepy wrote: »

Some peoples actions warrant them undeserving of the right to life imho. Were it not for the economic problems of imposing such law (i.e. costing more to fry them than lock them up in perpetuity) I'd be all for capital punishment.

I'm with Jackie on this one. Capital punishment is barbaric and has no place in civilised society.

ambro25 wrote: »

So, what can be done? Nothing, just enjoy the ride, vote whenever you can, talk to your TDs, and let democracy take care of itself.

Hmmmm.....

I think that is precisely the problem with democracy in Ireland at present. People assume that because Ireland has the democratic label, things will sort themselves out, good will prevail over evil, etc. They will vote every few years (but not if the election is held on a Thursday - far too inconvenient), talk to their TD's (if the TD's call to their front door and they're not in the middle of their dinner) and then hope for the best.

Sleepy

djpbarry wrote: »

I'm with Jackie on this one. Capital punishment is barbaric and has no place in civilised society.

I'm quite aware that my views on this are in the minority and tbh it's an issue I'm not all that passionate about as it really doesn't affect my daily life but to me it's a morality issue and as we know, all moral viewpoints are based on lines in the sand.

nesf

djpbarry wrote: »

I'm with Jackie on this one. Capital punishment is barbaric and has no place in civilised society.

We still should have the debate though.

oscarBravo

...just not necessarily in this thread. Or this forum either, for that matter. Humanities seems a better fit.

djpbarry

oscarBravo wrote: »

...just not necessarily in this thread. Or this forum either, for that matter. Humanities seems a better fit.

Done:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=54513878#post54513878

brianthebard

DrumSteve wrote: »

well i think the french had a bit of a better reason...

They were asked to retire at 52 instead of 50??

ambro25

brianthebard wrote: »

They were asked to retire at 52 instead of 50??

Nah, the loco drivers were asked to surrender the 1930s-obtained "coal allowance" (provided for hardship incurred in hauling coal into loco furnaces daily)... seen many coal-fired locos in France lately?

Same-o same-o with many, many, very many such "corporatists advantages", which have no real reason to be any more (and haven't for many years), but which relevant civil servants would rather die for than relinquish in the name of fairness.

Yup, shown my hand, no love lost, etc. I know

Jackie laughlin

DJP,
Poorly funded pressure groups represent the weak. Pluralism is a system which favours the rich and powerful.

Sleepy,
I'm a socialist and I certainly don't believe in an overweening state. Like you I want excellent education, health care and security for all. However, I also want a civilised society which avoids obscene levels of inequality and I would add a basic income and comfortable housing to your list. It's odd that you should raise the issue of rewarding hard work in relation to allocating college places but make no objection to unearned income.

I think you misunderstand me about college places. Because of the market system built around points the colleges have allowed points inflation to swamp terribly outdated basic entry requirements. It requires far too little effort to get into college. Many lecturers now spend time trying to teach literacy.

You favour capital punishment but you are not passionate about it! Chilling!

Do you understand why there is a bureaucracy? It's only recently become a term of abuse.

Sure there are inefficiencies in state operations but do you think that similar could not be found in private companies? Come on, you can't be that inexperienced!