FF vs FG?

Ideo

So tell me, what is the difference between FG and FF? I always kind of thought that they were pretty different but somebody said that there isn't much between them but didn't elaborate. I'd be interested to know what the real differences are!

Main difference is FF:Eamonn DeValera FG:Michael Collins

mikemac

Fine Gael didn't exist when Collins was around.
But I get your point anyway.

Dirk Gently

Ideo wrote: »

I'd be interested to know what the real differences are!

FF are in government

Mr.Micro

ones bad the other is worse

The_Minister

Both are centre-orientated populist parties. FG is right of centre, FF is ever so slightly left of centre (depending where you put the centre.

FG has a little flavor of Christian Democrat about it too.

Also, certain FG members want to rejoin the commonwealth, something that no FF'er would ever consider.

Aside from that very little.

Both have a myth associated with them selves.

Time Magazine

The_Minister wrote: »

Also, certain FG members want to rejoin the commonwealth, something that no FF'er would ever consider.

Sure? Positive?

The_Minister

Ibid wrote: »

Sure? Positive?

I stand corrected. Wow. You learn something new every day

Crash

never knew o cuiv was one who wanted to rejoin the commonwealth - interesting.

Jackie laughlin

It is tiresome how often people say that FF and FG are identical and that the only thing separating them is their origins in the first half of the 20th century. It is true that they have much in common but Irish people's voting demonstrates a desire to keep both parties separate. One easy guide to the difference is to look to their respective groups in the European Parliament where members sit not as national reps but in ideological groups.

Dirk Gently

Jackie laughlin wrote: »

One easy guide to the difference is to look to their respective groups in the European Parliament where members sit not as national reps but in ideological groups.

Seriously Jackie those Euro groups don't really mean a whole lot with regards to modern Irish party political ideology. Neither FF or FG have any major ideology, and neither does the labour party despite the socialist sounding language. It is a fair criticism to say there is not much to choose between the main parties, save some subtle differances that even politically minded people mention only in passing. FF are populists and labour and FG are inferior populists playing catchup on FF.

The PD's could lay claim to an ideology but they're not a major party.

Your points in the other thread are valid regarding the various parties but the differances are a lot more watered down than you make out.

A lack of ideology is not neccessarily a bad thing as ideology can be blinding but having the 3 biggest parties in the land display little obvious differance in direction is a bad thing. Take a step back from the party spin and ask yourself truely if the choice is healthy for people of differing views.

CerebralCortex

The way I see it is that FF and FG are ying and yang. There almost symbiotic. My impression from the last general election is that FF masterfully exploited FG's need/lust to make FF out to be bad guys and how they could do it better. I think it would serve FG better to be more constructive and provide level headed solutions as opposed to criticisms(which is all I hear from them).

I remember talking to a FG'er on Shop street in Galway and all he had to say essentially was that we're not FF.

Akrasia

FF are bad, FG are probably worse. (policy wise, forget about the corruption that seems to strike FF to its core) Its a lot like Labour vs Tory in the U.K. The Tories sometimes seem like the better option than labour but that's only because they're in opposition, if they were actually in power, they'd make the same mistakes and screw the people just as much, if not more.

Party politics only leads to one outcome, the slimiest guy wins. The party that can promise the most before an election will probably win, it doesn't matter whether or not the promises are genuine or not.

Time Magazine

Akrasia wrote: »

FF are bad, FG are probably worse.

Factual analysis at its most insightful, eh Akrasia?

Akrasia

Ibid wrote: »

Factual analysis at its most insightful, eh Akrasia?

well its from my own personal experiences dealing with YFG in student politics. FG are a little bit more right wing than FF (the width of a human hair) and both parties are perfectly willing to lie cheat and spin in order to gain political advantage.

I trust neither party, and because of this, electoral politics in Ireland is a total waste of time. (no matter what happens in an election, it's going to be either a FF or FG led government.)

Sigh.
This thread and that other one.
I sense the same thing.
1.The electorate have no right to hold an opinion
2.my(not mine,the poster's) opinion is king because well I'm omnipitent or something in terms of my views always being right and everyone else is wrong.
3.The electorate are wrong and I am right
4.We live in some sort of stepford wives scenario where the FF/FG big wigs are the equivalent of the men and the robot women are the voters.
Theres only a few that haven't been converted yet.
Save us akrasia,I beg of thee....

<wait...processing...I shouldn't have been able to say the above...I'm brainwashed like most of the electorate you see...we're all mindless...theres something wrong with the programme...processing...please wait...>

Akrasia

Tristrame wrote: »

Sigh.
This thread and that other one.
I sense the same thing.
1.The electorate have no right to hold an opinion
2.my(not mine,the poster's) opinion is king because well I'm omnipitent or something in terms of my views always being right and everyone else is wrong.
3.The electorate are wrong and I am right
4.We live in some sort of stepford wives scenario where the FF/FG big wigs are the equivalent of the men and the robot women are the voters.
Theres only a few that haven't been converted yet.
Save us akrasia,I beg of thee....

<wait...processing...I shouldn't have been able to say the above...I'm brainwashed like most of the electorate you see...we're all mindless...theres something wrong with the programme...processing...please wait...>

nice rant.

Might be a little bit more accurate if anywhere near the majority of Irish people were actively engaged in politics. The majority of Irish people don't follow politics very closely. The fact that politics in Ireland is so stagnant contributes to this fact, and it also sustains the stagnation. People are forced to vote based on a choice between different sets of lies, spin and 'optimistic projections'

As long as politics is boring and as long as politicians consistently lie and deceive, people won't pay much attention to it, As long as people don't pay attention to it, politics will be boring. Politicians consistently rank amongst the least trusted and respected professions. A choice between FF and FG is just as meaningful as a choice between Liverpool and Manchester United. Its all about marketing, spin, emotion, tradition.... in the end, both teams play the exact same game.

You can dress it up whatever way you like akrasia but in a nutshell what you are saying is you are right and the circa 60% that usually vote are mostly wrong.

Thats one hell of a leap conclusions wise.I can see why it has to be a leap obviously because it's a sweeping assumption about peoples voting intentions with no ground beneath it.

Sleepy

Tristrame wrote: »

Sigh.
This thread and that other one.
I sense the same thing.
1.The electorate have no right to hold an opinion
2.my(not mine,the poster's) opinion is king because well I'm omnipitent or something in terms of my views always being right and everyone else is wrong.
3.The electorate are wrong and I am right
4.We live in some sort of stepford wives scenario where the FF/FG big wigs are the equivalent of the men and the robot women are the voters.
Theres only a few that haven't been converted yet.
Save us akrasia,I beg of thee....

<wait...processing...I shouldn't have been able to say the above...I'm brainwashed like most of the electorate you see...we're all mindless...theres something wrong with the programme...processing...please wait...>

1. Do you believe that the majority of the electorate do actually hold an opinion? bonus question: what percentage of that electorat hold an educated opinion?
2. As you referenced my post, where do you think I'm wrong?
3. The electorate aren't given a chance to be right.
4. We live in a system whereby voters are encouraged to vote out of pure and utter self-interest rather than for the form of governance/government they feel will do the best job for the country as a whole.

Tristrame, what's your point? That things aren't perfect so just go with the best option? That there's no point in chasing a perfect system of governance? I see you pissing all over others ideas without really giving your own if you'll forgive the lack of eloquence of the expression.

Sleepy

Tristrame wrote: »

You can dress it up whatever way you like akrasia but in a nutshell what you are saying is you are right and the circa 60% that usually vote are mostly wrong.

Thats one hell of a leap conclusions wise.I can see why it has to be a leap obviously because it's a sweeping assumption about peoples voting intentions with no ground beneath it.

Not to fight akrasia's battles for him/her but aren't the electorate broadly in agreement with him/her? That FF are bad but FG are worse? That seemed to be the rational espoused by anyone I knew voting FF who wasn't doing so simply because mammy and daddy were...

Akrasia

Tristrame wrote: »

You can dress it up whatever way you like akrasia but in a nutshell what you are saying is you are right and the circa 60% that usually vote are mostly wrong.

Are you deliberately misinterpreting what I'm saying?

First of all, it is a complete fallacy to suggest that the people who usually vote do so for the reasons that the politicians claim afterwards. The reasons why people vote are as numerous as the votes cast.
What is true, and I have no doubt would be confirmed if a study were to be carried out, is that a large proportion of the voters are poorly informed. The majority base their decisions on the propaganda of the different parties, the vast majority of which is not worth the paper its printed in terms of accuracy and reliability. Others vote based on personal relationships (the fellah down the road), and access to power for local reasons (voting for a minister regardless of whether they like his/her policies or not because of the additional resources a sitting minister can bring to the area)



This is not a value judgement. It's not particularly their fault for using the easiest available information to make their decision. It is a systemic failure that such information is a minefield of bias, spin, lies, misinformation, inaccurate forecasts, blatant bribery and scaremongering.
Its also not particularly their fault that in this particular version of the game, the outcomes are limited to either a choice between FF or FG with a sideshow to decide who the coalition partners would be)

Thats one hell of a leap conclusions wise.I can see why it has to be a leap obviously because it's a sweeping assumption about peoples voting intentions with no ground beneath it.

No its not. The differences between FF and FG are about similar to the differences between Liverpool and Man UTD. The personalities are different, there are historical and family ties to the different clubs, they play a slightly different strategy but abide by exactly the same rules and with the same objective. Even though they are essentially the same, there can be huge rivalries between the different supporters, and the players rarely transfer between the two teams.

There are lots of fair weather supporters of Man Utd and Liverpool that follow them when times are good, but their real strength is in the die hard base who will fill the stadium week in week out for no reason other than loyalty tradition and some kind of shared identity

Again I must enquire akrasia as to this seemingly omnipitent knowledge you have of voters en masse to make your sweeping statements about them ?

Sleepy my point is simple.A person can vote for whatever party/person they like thats democracy.It's the way it should be.
Of course things aren't perfect.
If you are looking for perfection or even something 60% there you'll not get it.
You can keep espousing it of course.
Without espousing it,we'd probably not get 30% there.

Akrasia

Tristrame wrote: »

Again I must enquire akrasia as to this seemingly omnipitent knowledge you have of voters en masse to make your sweeping statements about them ?

My "sweeping statement" is that voters vote for different reasons. Are you suggesting that this is untrue? perhaps they're all controlled by a giant brain?

Sleepy my point is simple.A person can vote for whatever party/person they like thats democracy.It's the way it should be.

That's a form of democracy, it's not 'Democracy'. And it is a highly corrupted form of democracy. There is nothing to force the elected representatives to actually represent the people who voted for them after the election. There is no mechanism for liars to be recalled. Every politician in Clare promised to protect Ennis Hospital and secure investment for Shannon. The government representatives in the constituency have done nothing to honour those promises and there is nothing the electorate can do about it.

Of course things aren't perfect.

very far from perfect. There is a virus in the system. It needs to be reformed, but the people who benefit from the corruptions in the system are the only people who have the power to make the necessary reforms, and that would be like turkeys voting for christmas.

jmayo

Akrasia wrote: »

FF are bad, FG are probably worse. (policy wise, forget about the corruption that seems to strike FF to its core) Its a lot like Labour vs Tory in the U.K. The Tories sometimes seem like the better option than labour but that's only because they're in opposition, if they were actually in power, they'd make the same mistakes and screw the people just as much, if not more.

To quote a movie, "FF's greatest trick is convincing the electorate that FG would be even worse".

IMO the problem with Irish politics is that it can often boil down to what the local polician does for me.
The politicans have helped create a system where you need to get a politican to intercede on your behalf, with the civil service - civil establishment, to get what you deserve in the first place.
They have made themselves indispensable and thus the electorate believe they are beholden to them.

That is one reason idiots like Cullen, Flynn, Ellis get elected.

Another, but deminishing reason is the old party lines.
My grandad was a Dev man so I will be one also. This does have merit because in the past these people managed to get state jobs and state related contracts, the jobs for the boys scenario.

The last two elections have seen greed become a factor.
Young voters believe that the gravy train will stop if they don't keep FF in power. After all they were the party that gave us the gravy train and they make sure the great never ending construction boom will continue and benefit us all, well some of us more than others :rolleyes:
Actually we should thank Alan Dukes's tallaght strategy, CJH government finally getting things right circa 1987, IDA devlopment strategy, decreased corporation tax and the availability of cheap credit for the gravy train but bertie baffoon seems to have cornered the credit.

But until we put the greater national interest first and decide to truly reward a government for it's ineptness, by ignoring them at the polls, then we will be stuck with the same shower.

BTW I did not vote for the current shower of liars and chancers so it is not my fault

akrasia doen't like peoples decisions in the ballot box in a nutshell.

As regards failures in nimbyism,there is something the local electorate can do,they can realise that there are 26 counties governed by the Dáil not just one.The other 25 counties have an equal right to claim for some taxpayers money.
It's the job of the elected government to make an attempt at the share out infrastructurally.
Some win,some lose from the far from bottomless purse.
Thats an inevitability.

Akrasia

Tristrame wrote: »

akrasia doen't like peoples decisions in the ballot box in a nutshell.

I can speak for myself thank you very much.

I object to the corrupt system far more than the decisions made by voters.

I also object to the 'everything's fine jack' attitude that you are displaying. There are serious serious failings in our political system, many of which have obvious solutions that are never ever put before the people to vote on.

Agent Smith

Akrasia wrote: »

There are serious serious failings in our political system, many of which have obvious solutions that are never ever put before the people to vote on.

Discuss...

Akrasia

agent smith wrote: »

Discuss...

Very first and most important issue. Recallable representatives. There is no mechanism in Ireland whereby an elected official can be recalled by his/her electorate should he/she betray the trust or wishes of those he/she was supposed to represent.

Second, election manifestos should be given the status of legal contracts enforcable by the courts. Why should the public have to vote on manifestos and election promises when there is absolutely nothing to prevent politicians from breaking those promises as soon as they are elected.

moe_sizlak

both parties are centre right although some FF voters like to think of there party as being for the little guy and of being centre left

there are personality differences though , while im generalising , ff are cute hoors who while crooked get the job done , fg are preppy strictly by the book honest to god nice boys who due to there puritan streak dont have the killer instinct that there FF counterparts have , while fg are more conservative on some issues , there also more pluralist than ff on the national question although that has changed lately

all in all there are subtle differences but not much difference on general policy

Akrasia

Akrasia wrote: »

I object to the corrupt system

If it were that corrupt,you could never vote anyone out.
You see, it's you thats saying it's corrupt.
It's your opinion.
What I'm saying is how can you say your opinion applies to everyone else.

I also object to the 'everything's fine jack' attitude that you are displaying.

I wouldn't say I'm saying everything is fine,I believe I said it's like many other things when looking for perfection,we're about 60% there.

There are serious serious failings in our political system, many of which have obvious solutions that are never ever put before the people to vote on.

Examples?

Very first and most important issue. Recallable representatives. There is no mechanism in Ireland whereby an elected official can be recalled by his/her electorate should he/she betray the trust or wishes of those he/she was supposed to represent.

Fine in theory,impossible/unworkable/unwieldy in practice.
You'd get no decisions made,nothing done.

Second, election manifestos should be given the status of legal contracts enforcable by the courts. Why should the public have to vote on manifestos and election promises when there is absolutely nothing to prevent politicians from breaking those promises as soon as they are elected.

Wishy washy idealism and unworkable as circumstances can change many times within a 5 year term.
That and when a "new" party enters government and look at the figures properly they often have to prioritise their wishes in order of feasibility
Manifesto's are never presented as fait complit's in a STV system where no party can get a majority.At best they are a list of desires parties agree with.

Jackie laughlin

So, let's get this right. There is no significant difference between Ireland's political parties. They are all liars. Nothing can be done. Everything is spin and marketing. Handy, very handy! Now all the cynic has to do is growl at everything.

The problem is that politics in Ireland is relatively free of corruption. (Calm yourself! I said "relatively".) There is significant - if not considerable -difference between the parties.

Having said this, there is no sensible argument for revolutionary change. Those of us who disagree with with our neo-liberal, anti-egalitarian society are reformers. That is to say we favour the parliamentary route and gradual change. (No, not necessarily slow - just gradual as opposed to revolutionary.) This tends to limit the policy options. Those options are further limited when a party seeks mass support as there is no future in alienating a huge slice of the electorate. The "problem" is further compounded in Ireland where the vast majority are ideologically of like mind and find the differences between the two major parties to be sufficient choice.

We live in an unjust society and we really can do without the peddlars of despair and their sanctimonious desire to pretend that they are political virgins awaiting super suitor.

Cynicism is considered cool right now. It ought to be ruthlessly challenged. On second thoughts, perhaps it should be treated with contempt and allowed to wither.