Declan Ganley shows true colours by attending a religious conference

ChocolateSauce

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/0209/1233867926979.html

During the Lisbon referendum, Ganley and Libertas were painted as the "respectable No" side, meaning they weren't radical lefties, they weren't ultra-Catholics or ultra-nationalists, they were just good EU citizens with real concerns about the state of affairs, and felt that Lisbon should be voted down on its own merits, not because they wanted to stick it to the EU.

I bought into this illusion, as did many others. But by agreeing to speak at a conference organised by the Pope John Paul II society, and co-hosted by a pro-life group, he has revealed himself to be intrinsically at odds with the EU and many things it is supposed to stand for, namely a human-rights-respecting, secular institution which promises civil liberties.

He openly opposed gay marriage and abortion, played the nationalist card, virtually declared himself a servant of the Vatican, and criticised modern society.

Although he also praised the EU for its record on many things, and claimed he wanted it to be more accountable (though this is one thing the Lisbon treaty did), these words to my ears sound as empty as those of the average Alive! reader, or a card-carrying Shinner.

In my newly-held opinion, Libertas is just another conservative, right-wing, nationalist and catholic party, not at all worthy of being labeled "respectable".

Scofflaw

It all comes out in the wash eventually. To be fair, while there were some strong pointers at the time, Libertas did their level best to conceal their agenda, and Declan Ganley his level best to allow people to project onto him whatever they wanted to see.

They're still at it, which is probably why Libertas have no published policies, and why they want the euro elections to be about Lisbon - because that saves them from having to reveal their policy agenda. It also explains the claim that they won't do anything with the EU money they get "until after we have a mandate" - in other words, they won't reveal what they're going to do with the money until after you've voted.

I'm not even sure they even care about Lisbon - it could simply have been a convenient launching pad for getting a Catholic party into the EU Parliament. I appreciate that's a somewhat Machiavellian view, but Libertas seem to be a self-consciously Machiavellian organisation.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Amberman

Scofflaw...who pays you to sit here all day and be an EU apologist?

Scofflaw

Amberman wrote: »

Scofflaw...who pays you to sit here all day and be an EU apologist?

Sadly, I do it for free - mostly, I admit, as a way of avoiding the work I should be doing (indeed, it's one of my two main forms of work avoidance). What is it about the Libertas issue in particular that makes you ask that question?

workshyly,
Scofflaw

r3nu4l

Well, I was always puzzled by Libertas, they conducted their campaign with the same sort of vehemence and mis-direction I usually associate with religous 'fundamentalists' groups. I'm therefore not surprised to see or hear about this turn of events.

Whether you agree with Lisbon or not, rallying around a figure like Ganley without a clear understanding of the full scope of their policy and agenda is foolhardy.

My enemies enemy is not always my friend!

lostexpectation

they plenty of stuff about this during the campaign, a person who worked on the anti abortion (info) campaigns as a spokeswomen, another aid who was is a fundy catholic, 'doing this for god'.

lostexpectation

theres the audio
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0209/breaking57.htm

Amberman

Scofflaw wrote: »

Sadly, I do it for free - mostly, I admit, as a way of avoiding the work I should be doing (indeed, it's one of my two main forms of work avoidance). What is it about the Libertas issue in particular that makes you ask that question?

workshyly,
Scofflaw

to be honest, I admire Declan Ganley, even though I share few of his religious/political views apart from my dislike of the Lisbon treaty...but I think hes wasting his time. Lisbon WILL go through. Surely no one can doubt that. Over the long term, it is already impossible to fight this movement in a meaningful way.

With concessions, implied threats, slick PR and Scofflaw on thier side, how can they fail? It is impossible for ordinary people to fully understand the ramifications of the Lisbon treaty, since the actors havent yet tipped their hands as to the likely direction the EU will take once they get their prize.

The Lisbon treaty could be a great force for democracy, but it could also turn into a totalitarian nightmare run by unelected bureaucrats. Which path we go down has yet to be decided...the long term consequences are unknown, so in reality, its a leap into the dark.

We can argue about what will happen until the cows come home. The truth is that no one knows because the range of possibilities are huge...and past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Just because the EU has been benign and benelovent in the past doesnt mean it will be in the future.

The only real question is how many concessions we manage to wring out of the EU before they get the Yes vote...which is a foregone conclusion in the long run...IMO. This is the reason we should all vote NO again.

Scofflaw

Amberman wrote: »

to be honest, I admire Declan Ganley, even though I share few of his religious/political views apart from my dislike of the Lisbon treaty...but I think hes wasting his time. Lisbon WILL go through. Surely no one can doubt that. Over the long term, it is already impossible to fight this movement in a meaningful way.

I have to say I don't admire him. I don't think that saying one thing out of one side of your mouth and something else out the other is admirable.

Amberman wrote: »

With concessions, implied threats, slick PR and Scofflaw on thier side, how can they fail?

I'm not quite sure how to take that, but I'm going to go for it being flattery!

Amberman wrote: »

It is impossible for ordinary people to fully understand the ramifications of the Lisbon treaty, since the actors havent yet tipped their hands as to the likely direction the EU will take once they get their prize.

The Lisbon treaty could be a great force for democracy, but it could also turn into a totalitarian nightmare run by unelected bureaucrats. Which path we go down has yet to be decided...the long term consequences are unknown, so in reality, its a leap into the dark.

We can argue about what will happen until the cows come home. The truth is that no one knows because the range of possibilities are huge...and past performance is no guarantee of future performance. Just because the EU has been benign and benelovent in the past doesnt mean it will be in the future.

Well, I could be killed crossing the road any day, but I still go out of the house.

I appreciate what you're saying - that one should always look at the powers being granted to government in terms of how they would work if government was hostile. The difference here is that we're not handing any powers over to government that they don't already have - instead, the government is agreeing to exercise those powers in consensus with the other EU governments. Since I consider the outcome of EU decision-making to be generally more transparent, more legally conformable, and more rights-focused than decision-making in Ireland, I tend to regard that as a positive step.

While the government's exercise of its discretion within the EU undoubtedly tends to be politically unaccountable, I consider that to result from a combination of the unaccountability of Ireland's political system, and the lack of oversight exercised here by citizen groups and their representatives. The government's largely successful blaming of school water charges on the EU is a case in point - and the government also plays both ends against the middle by judiciously playing the nationalist card.

The Lisbon Treaty does give greater control over the EU process to the citizen - if the citizen chooses to use it. If, on the other hand, the EU chose to 'turn nasty', it runs into the problem that it has no armies, no police, no way of enforcing its will except the agreement of member states - and so the EU turning nasty requires that first every government in it must agree to use it for evil. If that happens, the EU is the least of our concerns.

Amberman wrote: »

The only real question is how many concessions we manage to wring out of the EU before they get the Yes vote...which is a foregone conclusion in the long run...IMO. This is the reason we should all vote NO again.

A dismal reason, and probably past its sell-by date.

cordially,
Scofflaw

turgon

Amberman wrote: »

With concessions, implied threats, slick PR and Scofflaw on thier side, how can they fail? It is impossible for ordinary people to fully understand the ramifications of the Lisbon treaty, since the actors havent yet tipped their hands as to the likely direction the EU will take once they get their prize.

Ok buddy so we will trust Libertas and Còir instead?

So theres going to be an EU Army, Neutrality is over, Conscription is introduced, Abortion is legalized, all our money going to France etc etc.

And it takes some neck for an "admirer" of Declan Ganley to give out about threats.

Amberman

They're involved in politics...they all "spin"....I don't trust any of them...but to take a stand against the sorts of powerful people he has stood against takes guts. I admire that. He knew there would be a smear campaign and that they would try to discredit him. Whatever his reasons, he has paid a price far higher than any slabber on this board...and ALL Irish people will reap the benefits.

Scofflaw...it was meant as a compliment...you are a very formidible person to be on the opposite side of the argument from. I havent read as much as you have and dont understand it to the degree that you do, but I have to say that a group of Rand Corporation game theorists would very likely disagree with you about the optimal way for Ireland to proceed.

Right now, we have something that is worth a lot...our compliance. It is inevitable that this advantage wont be ours for long...so we should wring every last concession from it that we can manage to get.

Id prefer us never to ratify Lisbon, but it is inevitable in my book...this machine cant be stopped, but it can be delayed and we should use our position to our advantage. Its just the smart thing to do.

As for all the YES voters, Irish people will be in a better position because of the no campaign...like or dislike Declan Ganley...you have benefited from his dissent...even if the extend of that benefit is a more informed public.

But somehow, it seems unfair that the Yes camp gets a second crack at it...the No camp wouldnt if the result had gone against them.

Phototoxin

We've said no. Why can that not be respected.

I'm tempted to rape a sheep or something just to use it as a defence in court at this stage.

Well judge, no means yes as the government will tell you...

And until you've met someone who talks in the rhawest of accents and is handing out legion of mary cards after a latin mass you've never even been near an ultra-catholic

ChocolateSauce

Amberman wrote: »

They're involved in politics...they all "spin"....I don't trust any of them...but to take a stand against the sorts of powerful people he has stood against takes guts. I admire that. He knew there would be a smear campaign and that they would try to discredit him. Whatever his reasons, he has paid a price far higher than any slabber on this board...and ALL Irish people will reap the benefits.

What price? He's a famous millionaire who is now running for elected office. Hardly a dismal turn of events in his life.

ShooterSF

The more I read about him the more I dislike him. Thank god I didn't vote No because of him. I'd be rather sick right now. But then again as I've said before I feel the same after voting for most politicians as I never agree with more than a few of their views.

Scofflaw

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

What price? He's a famous millionaire who is now running for elected office. Hardly a dismal turn of events in his life.

But, but...people have said rude things about him! They've disbelieved him! He can't live a totally private life! He's afraid to appear in public to do photoshoots - well, alright, not really. Why, his business interests might even have suffered (although since nobody knows exactly what they are, that's hard to call)!

Sure didn't that Czech bloke say he was exactly the same as dissidents under the Soviets - who were, admittedly, arrested, harassed, starved in gulags, beaten, tortured and shot, often along with their families. Still, they probably weren't as important as Decko. Everything's relative, after all (except morality, of course).

amused,
Scofflaw

Amberman

ChocolateSauce wrote: »

What price? He's a famous millionaire who is now running for elected office. Hardly a dismal turn of events in his life.

hes gone from relative obscurity to being hated and derided by half the country...and to having made some very powerful enemies. I'd say thats a high price to pay.

Scofflaw

Amberman wrote: »

hes gone from relative obscurity to being hated and derided by half the country...and to having made some very powerful enemies. I'd say thats a high price to pay.

He's also made some very powerful friends and achieved a large measure of public recognition, which presumably balances the books somewhat. You can't really enter politics without making enemies, though, any more than you can go skinny-dipping without getting wet.

Also, of course, he was quite well-known before Lisbon. I first heard of him when he opened Adornis.com, and then he was pretty visible as a flamboyant FF backer, running the best tent at the Galway races where the Bolly flowed like water. We're not talking about a man with a fear of publicity here.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The Corinthian

Scofflaw wrote: »

He's also made some very powerful friends and achieved a large measure of public recognition, which presumably balances the books somewhat.

Not by much. The Catholic right in Ireland just isn't what it used to be; the influence of the Church is a shadow of what it used to be since the mid-nineties, and most of the Catholic groups are little more than kitchen committees run by nut-jobs. Even the more influential groups, such as Opus Dei, are overly monastic, which means that they really have a limited understanding of the outside World and how to influence it.

I know this because I was actively involved in conservative politics a long time ago, and while I have never been terribly religious, or Eurosceptic, I did share some of their views. Really dynamic realists are few and far between there, and so I'd have to say Ganley is a rare specimen indeed, in that he can apply realistic, if Machiavellian, aims and methods where the others are two cocooned in their faith and cliques to get anywhere.

Of course, that was then and a combination of growing older, and realizing that the envelope is a far better tool of political will than the ballot, cured me of all that.

So I have a certain level of admiration for Ganley, although I would still trust him about as far as I'd spit a dead rat.

Amberman wrote: »

The Lisbon treaty could be a great force for democracy, but it could also turn into a totalitarian nightmare run by unelected bureaucrats. Which path we go down has yet to be decided...the long term consequences are unknown, so in reality, its a leap into the dark.

It's a fair point. I do think that the scenario of a totalitarian nightmare run by unelected bureaucrats is exaggerated, however what is there is certainly not the best. A lot of this comes down to national politics; we want our sovereign states to remain in control, so anything at a supernational level has to be appointed by them. Ergo the bureaucrats.

To make it democratic would in effect dilute democratic sovereignty of the nation states, so we all avoid it. It's a political limbo that could continue for a very long time - the Swiss were in exactly the same situation for about 500 years; it took Napoleon to invade them, impose a central government and then get kicked out before they decided that maybe, seeing as they got their asses kicked so easily, ceding some regional sovereignty might make sense...

The only real question is how many concessions we manage to wring out of the EU before they get the Yes vote...which is a foregone conclusion in the long run...IMO. This is the reason we should all vote NO again.

I don't think there will be any more concessions. If Ireland reject Lisbon again, it will die. The question then is what happens next, which is difficult to say, however one thing is certain - we'll be put sitting at the same table as the UK from then on.

ChocolateSauce

Scofflaw wrote: »

Why, his business interests might even have suffered (although since nobody knows exactly what they are, that's hard to call)!

Yeah, what the hell are his "business interests" anyway? I never heard of him before Lisbon, and I've been an avid news reader since I was 14.

hes gone from relative obscurity to being hated and derided by half the country...and to having made some very powerful enemies. I'd say thats a high price to pay.

Scofflaw's said it all. Anyway, if I decided to run for office on my own platform, I'd make many friends and even more enemies, and I'd revel in the hate from my detractors; it's how I'd know I was doing it right.