Direct Democracy Ireland: the split?

Scofflaw

Looks as if DDI are following the grand tradition of Irish political parties, and splitting:



The reasons are, apparently, that members have discovered that the actual constitution of the party hands veto powers to a permanent inner council, and the AGM in question was limited to "branch coordinators and aspiring branch coordinators".

All of which suggests, of course, that DDI had decided to resolve the internal difficulties of a direct democracy movement by using representative democracy and an inner council like the UN Security Council. Not exactly "direct", but then DDI always seemed to me to be more about the Freeman on the Land philosophy than direct democracy.

Since a rash of ugliness last night their Facebook page has been tidied up, and all seems well:

DDI Waterford wrote:

In case anyone is wondering, there are some unfounded rumours circulating regarding DDI. YES (of course!) DDI is alive and well, and whilst we expected a few to try to knock what we are doing, especially from the establishment parties, we were sad to see some get personal. The good news is that we had a very productive national meeting despite the actions of a few, and we really are making progress Watch this space....

but we can probably expect fresh outbreaks of splittism from what the DDI faithful have apparently described as "establishment plants":

I personally know some of the people who walked out. they are not belonging to any other eatablished party, and have no other agenda other than pure direct democracy. But for some reason this line is being taken and good people tarnished. I have been watching the so called rumours and the counter responses to those so called rumours, and cannot say I am impressed. Have seen the 'spin' in action myself personally at another meeting, and see it is just continuing now.

I am well intentioned but more importantly fair. I have taken the time to look at both sides and do some research. And I am not seeing openess, accountability or transparency.

cordially,
Scofflaw

BlutendeRabe

Good riddance.

Akrasia

I would be very interested in a direct democracy party in Ireland but it would need to be structured in a very specific way.
An inner council or a steering committee with 5 'permanent members' would be completely unacceptable to me

democrates

Hands up, I've spoken in support of this party before. Obviously I'm very disappointed with what I've just found out today.

It seems the assurances given regarding alleged links with the freeman movement failed to furnish the whole truth.
A draft programme for government never materialised.
The finances remain opaque.
There was mobbish behaviour including alleged assault leading to bench warrants involving that well-intended but ill-conceived 2Bn euro property trust.
The party structure has a five man 'security council' with veto powers.

Without transparency, people are denied the ability to make an informed choice. I guess the silver lining is that a new party can start afresh with just the sensible elements - hope springs eternal.

Scofflaw

democrates wrote: »

Hands up, I've spoken in support of this party before. Obviously I'm very disappointed with what I've just found out today.

It seems the assurances given regarding alleged links with the freeman movement failed to furnish the whole truth.
A draft programme for government never materialised.
The finances remain opaque.
There was mobbish behaviour including alleged assault leading to bench warrants involving that well-intended but ill-conceived 2Bn euro property trust.
The party structure has a five man 'security council' with veto powers.

Without transparency, people are denied the ability to make an informed choice. I guess the silver lining is that a new party can start afresh with just the sensible elements - hope springs eternal.

I'm not sorry to see DDI's facade crack, but not because it removes a potential direct democracy force from the political field - on the contrary, I'm pleased because I've felt all along that DDI were channeling people's genuine intentions into a pit of snake oil and brown stuff, and thereby taking up space that could be used for a real direct democracy force.

cordially,
Scofflaw

democrates

Scofflaw wrote: »

I'm not sorry to see DDI's facade crack, but not because it removes a potential direct democracy force from the political field - on the contrary, I'm pleased because I've felt all along that DDI were channeling people's genuine intentions into a pit of snake oil and brown stuff, and thereby taking up space that could be used for a real direct democracy force.

cordially,
Scofflaw

You were right all along. I had hoped that the wisdom of crowds would soon counter the early wingnuts, but the party 'security council' were positioned from day 1 to prevent direct democracy within the party.
I hear the break-away group are already discussing their options.

Am Chile

To be honest Im half disappointed and half relief- even before direct democracy ireland was even launched-I was a supporter of the Swiss direct democracy system.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79537238&postcount=1



I always felt there was a need for a direct democracy political party in ireland- its just an awful pity there was freeman on the land elements involved with direct democracy ireland when they first launched around a year ago I had my doubts-hopefully the people who left ddi will set up a direct democracy political party that has no links to the freemen.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81773515&postcount=59

democrates

Am Chile wrote: »

To be honest Im half disappointed and half relief- even before direct democracy ireland was even launched-I was a supporter of the Swiss direct democracy system.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=79537238&postcount=1



I always felt there was a need for a direct democracy political party in ireland- its just an awful pity there was freeman on the land elements involved with direct democracy ireland when they first launched around a year ago I had my doubts-hopefully the people who left ddi will set up a direct democracy political party that has no links to the freemen.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=81773515&postcount=59

Looks like they will indeed start a new party " This time with openness and transparency." - https://www.facebook.com/DDIresignationsandrebellion

Once more into the breach!

hatrickpatrick

"Surely we should be uniting against our common enemy!"
"THE JUDEAN PEOPLE'S FRONT?!"
"..............No no the Romans!"
"..."
"..."
"...Oh yeah..."

democrates

Chairman of the Cork branch Noel Maguire resigned his position on Sunday. “I’ve never even seen a list of the members in Cork and I was the chairman.

“We had concern when we had to keep asking for a copy of the constitution. In the end, we had to get it from Leinster House. When I saw it, I said this is the polar opposite of democracy. This is a dictatorship.”

src - http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/direct-democracy-splits-as-rebels-say-its-undemocratic-247454.html

So was any politician in Leinster House clever enough to read the DDI constitution sitting there?
My guess is yes and it was whispered around but they were waiting to drop the bomb just before the election. Such a simple trick would be par for the course in politics, but let's also note that it would have denied the electorate a chance to vote for a credible party offering direct democracy.

Scofflaw

democrates wrote: »

src - http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/direct-democracy-splits-as-rebels-say-its-undemocratic-247454.html

So was any politician in Leinster House clever enough to read the DDI constitution sitting there?
My guess is yes and it was whispered around but they were waiting to drop the bomb just before the election. Such a simple trick would be par for the course in politics, but let's also note that it would have denied the electorate a chance to vote for a credible party offering direct democracy.

To be honest, I'm afraid I really really doubt that.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sierra Oscar

Direct Democracy Ireland - Resignations and Rebellion

Based on the insight we are getting into the internal workings of DDI from now former activists, it is really difficult to see as to how the party is any more democratic than the current established parties. In fact it seems to be profoundly more undemocratic. I can't think of any executive in FF / FG / LAB / SF that is permanently appointed and unaccountable.

Said it before and I will say it again, DDI is all about giving Ben Gilroy his own little soapbox and it was only a matter of time before people saw through this charade. I feel sorry for the activists who put in their time and effort into DDI.

Hijpo

Although i was interested in DDI im happy that there seems to be a change in new political parties.

You wouldnt have seen that happen in the other parties, the leaders would have been defended to the hilt. Atleast with DDI a problem was spotted and the members said change it or get lost. It wasnt changed and the members stuck to there guns. I think it shows that peoples heads are in the right place when it comes to politics now, they want tarnsparency, honesty, accountability and communication and if those traits are not applicable parties should not be anywhere near the driving seat of this country. It maight take 4 or 5 new parties to finally weed out all the dodgy bastards but at some point it will be achieved.


hopefully....

ArmaniJeanss

Statement by original DDI in the last few hours.

http://directdemocracyireland.ie/statement-current-party-issues-25th-oct-2013/

I assume as a press release it can be c&p'ed in full?

Very long (the section from Problems in Cork down is probably the best bits. One very telling paragraph in particular in my opinion).

*******


Bad behavior by ex members

A lot of exaggeration, false information and extreme media spin about DDI has been maliciously and meticulously circulated in the last few days. It seems our un-tarnishable message must be hitting a raw nerve with the establishment to have attracted all this attention. We take pride in that and it spurs us on. We will not let them stop us.

When Mick Clifford of the Examiner rang our office on Thursday, he seemed determined to paint the recent walk out of seven members (out of our thousand members) from a meeting as some kind of a “split” in the grandiose big political style. Splits are things that happen to government parties with TDs and ministers, not to fledgeling parties finding their feet. People come and go from parties all the time, and 7 people walking out because they could not get their way in a meeting is hardly news. So what is the agenda there?

The perpetrators of the walk out have since organised a vindictive online campaign which has persisted for nearly a week. It is very much in the style of previous sustained attacks we have suffered from opposition parties we directly threaten like Sinn Fein and the Socialist group. We had not intended to get involved in online spats because feeding these things tends to cause more problems. However the perpetrators of this appalling and dishonourable behavior have now gone too far.

They are setting up libelous websites and vandalising the DDI network with spam. Worse still they have been spamming false information to DDI members personally, and even to the members’ families and friends. What we see here is a deliberate attempt to harm DDI to stop us from spreading our empowering message. A message that is beginning to have real results in Ireland (as our Seanad campaign recently proved with every county we campaigned in returning a no vote). At best this is all simply character and ego driven, but at worst it is nefarious and contrived.

All of this was created in the wake of a delegates meeting at the weekend at which 3 individuals from a combined preliminary Cork constituency and members from Offally, repeatedly disrupted the meeting in an attempt to press their agenda. This was not the first meeting in which this happened. Their agenda being to remove almost everyone managing and developing Direct Democracy as a political service.

The fact remains that nothing they were asking for could even be voted upon within the rules until a general assembly was called, yet the disruption continued. as it had in previous meetings from the same source. They refused to abide by any of the rules or acknowledge the democratic majority in the room.

After hours of disruption they did not manage to persuade the rest of the constituency delegates in the meeting to support their agenda. The remaining delegates did not agree with their demands and expressed this again by democratic vote. But rather than agree with the democratic consensus in the room, they chose to storm out insulting the remaining delegates. They later resigned their membership and started a bitter online campaign claiming that the democratic decisions were somehow ‘not democratic’ (because they did not get their way).

Let’s clear up a few false claims.

Nobody on the council is paid.
In fact nobody at all in DDI has ever been paid for their tireless work.

Interestingly the agitators deliberately failed to explain that DDI members “may” be paid – (this means merely remunerated for the personal expenses which they have incurred in the setup of this political party). They also neglect to mention the constitution also states there is no legal obligation for anyone to be paid. This also applies to the Executive which includes county delegates.

Contrary to their claims about links with “an extreme political party in the UK”, we can easily state that DDI has no links with any parties in the UK.

Another claim is that DDI is connected to a “Freedom of the Land Movement”, a claim that RTE also tried to insinuate in their recent Prime Time program ‘hit piece’ against the Irish people. People who have the audacity to think they should stand up against the banking cartel that with the government’s help has destroyed our country. ‘How dare we!’ However we would ask you how would that be plausible when apparently most ‘Freemen’ do not support the notion of government or politics? Yet DDI is a political party trying to get into government is it not? That would be a hard one to resolve.

All that aside there is one main issue we wish to address and that is the constitution.

Claims are made that it was some kind of ‘big secret’. It is nothing of the sort. Firstly it is in the public domain along with every other political party constitution at Leinster House, and it is as dull as all the others. The fact of the matter is that in these early stages the constitution has never been needed, until now, to answer any queries. We have all cooperated and compromised without much ado. There is no issue in sending it to our constituency groups for future reference now it is at last becoming relevant.

Secondly the general structures therein are designed for a large well established party. They are to be introduced as and when they become necessary otherwise they would become too cumbersome on a small and growing new party. We operate on the bare minimum of structures to allow complete flexibility in this time of rapid change. We have relaxed most of the rules so that groups can self-organise preliminary committees and participate in voting, despite most constituencies not yet having completed all stages of development to be fully ratified. Indeed the constituencies who have been properly constituted and ratified have been gracious enough to allow this relaxation and equal rights, and we thank them for that inclusive spirit.

Now the main issue is where they claim there is a veto because there are five permanent members on the council, aka the signatories who founded the party. They would have you believe that every decision in DDI will be vetoed by this group and it is a dictatorship (their words). This is nonsense.

Yes, there is a temporary council of permanent members. The purpose of these five individuals is to protect the political party from being taken over by unsavory individuals or groups. It makes perfect sense that if a political party begins to be a force to be reckoned with, it shall be open to attack, possible infiltration and their ultimate demise. It is for this reason a council is in-situ. The council exists only for a limited time, and will remain only for as long as it takes for the party to reach a critical mass where it has an clear identity and common ethos among it’s members and officers throughout the structure that will sustain it against such attacks.

The reason behind this goes back 6 years. Raymond Whitehead tried unsuccessfully a number of times to get DDI off the ground in the five years before the current relaunch (November 2012). Each time control of the organisation was lost quite quickly. This unfortunately prevented DDI from reaching the populace for 5 years, but there are no grudges held, there is no ill will toward anyone. It was what it was for it’s time, and perhaps it is only now that the time is right for DDI.

When it was relaunched all the members were invited to the first AGM. The attendees agreed that they needed a mechanism to stop the party failing again. A way to protect it from takeover in it’s early growth stages until it was large enough, and with a clearly defined style and ethos, to attract like minded members in enough numbers that would protect it from subversion and takeover. Hence the members unanimously agreed that if DDI was going to survive the growing stage of the party then it needed a safeguard in the form of a temporary council of permanent members to act as guardians of the ethos and protect it from usurpation until such time the party was unassailable. When that period of time has elapsed, and if the members at the general assembly think they are happy to run without the council, then they can vote to end the practice. They could of course, if they so wished, vote to extend it, though that would be highly unlikely.

It would be naive of commentators to ridicule the idea without proper consideration. For instance, imagine if say a new socialist party set up tomorrow and after a few of months they had gathered together two hundred members. General assemblies tend to only attract a percentage of the members, maybe 25%. (so 50 in this example). We could easily get a hundred people to join up and all attend the assembly and call a motion to dissolve the party, and we would win. Much less is needed when looking to take over committees as a current example later will show you. It is what the socialist party do in many protest groups, and this was highlighted in it’s extreme with the campaign against household and water charges which has now fallen by the wayside since.

It seems the direct democracy message that DDI is pushing is something none of the established parties want to see in Ireland. Hence, they have attacked us from all sides since we launched to try and stop this message getting out. Attacks from without, and now seemingly from within, as expected.

We believe when the time comes there will not be a need to extend this safeguard as it has not so far come into play and will eventually become redundant. However when it does it is the members democratic decision alone. Most members have not taken issue with this virtually redundant safeguard because they share the same philosophy and mission for DDI. Those who take issue with it perhaps do not fully share the DDI mission and wish to change it.

The whole walk out debacle after the attempted coup d’état at last weekend’s meeting proved that point. At no time was it even necessary to refer to the council because the other delegates in the room themselves quashed any motion to change DDI from what it was envisaged. We thank them for that and trust their judgement.

Problems in Cork

At this point we wish to put the record straight for two members in Cork whom we regret we did not give enough support to earlier in the year and unreservedly apologise for that failure on our part. They did a lot of work in getting local people and local businesses interested in supporting DDI at the outset.

Back in May Joe Blake and Catherine Murphy set about organising two large meetings in Cork with presentations to get DDI off the ground there. They were both successful and resulted in a group being formed followed by further smaller regular meetings. At one of these follow up meetings Joe was elected Chair of the Cork group and Catherine was elected Secretary and Treasurer as nobody else wanted that job. Two ordinary members of the committee were also elected. One of those being Elizabeth who became the chief agitator in later months. A second co-agitator Maurice was added to the committee in following meetings, encouraged by Elizabeth.

However during the summer a meeting was called for a Saturday morning. While Joe and Catherine had both advised the committee they would be absent that morning (Joe in Limerick with a potential DDI backer, and Catherine at a funeral mass for a young relative), the meeting was not put off to a later time. In their absence Joe and Catherine were cynically removed from the committee and replaced with another friend of the two agitators called Noel who was made Chairman. These three, who later caused the disruption at our national meetings, now had control of DDI Cork’s committee.

In recent days we have received many phone calls from people in Cork who attended the first meeting in the Silversprings Hotel who have said they left DDI Cork but would be delighted to come back now the committee has resigned. There were also calls from people who would not join before because of the make up of the committee. In fact the slow progress in Cork since the takeover has meant Cork has surprisingly yet to achieve status as a properly constituted constituency.

What seems to have occurred in Cork is an orchestrated take over that made the constituency dysfunctional and in opposition to DDI principles. Whether this was due to egos or due to sabotage perhaps we will never know. However the facts speak for themselves and they have all the usual hallmarks of takeover attempts over protest and campaign groups that we have seen destroyed in the last few years.

This was expected and we will not be allowing this to happen to DDI. Our intention to bring direct democracy back to the Irish people is far too important to let it fail. We have up to now been very lenient and relaxed about the setting up of groups and the approval process for members and officers. It encouraged a spirit of openness, inclusion and autonomy. This perhaps is too trusting and leaves us open to infiltration and insurrection by other parties. It is unfortunate that people behave this way, so we will from now on be forced to use more of the rules available to us to prevent these problems re-occurring.

DDI is not a free for all where all political beliefs can gather. That cannot work. It is a party with it’s own specific ethos and mission. We do not want that mission to change, nor should it. We want to attract people who share that vision, rather than those who oppose it. There are plenty of parties with different missions to suit all all types of people. There is no point trying to change one that doesn’t suit you.

We are looking forward to regrouping very soon in Cork and electing a new committee from the members and welcome back all those who have contacted us this week who left the Cork group disillusioned over the summer.

We would request The Examiner make good over the “Split” article and correct the context to something resembling reality. Front page would be nice again! While at the same time we thank Mick Clifford because on reading his article many people in Cork have phoned to say they wish to join and/or re-affirm membership with DDI now the committee is being replaced.

We would also extend a hand to anyone who felt disenfranchised by the negative internet campaign being carried out by these operatives and their allies, and hope the reality is clearer now you have full information.

Remember it doesn’t matter how much muck they try to sling at DDI or at the individuals in DDI because the message of control over government is made of Teflon. Nothing can stick to it.

Let’s keep the establishment on the run.

Direct Democracy Ireland

Calhoun

The article is pretty much what I would expect from any organisation imploding, all it does is fan the crazy.

I don't buy the whole cloak and dagger storyline, I would have assumed most if not all political parties wouldn't bother their ass infiltrating and trying to destroy the new party from the inside out because there are many more pitfalls out there to stop fledgling organisation (monetary ect).

To use this as the sole basis for having an undemocratic setup or dictatorship if you will is ridiculous, what's worse is the text talking about abolishing it is very wishy washy.

Then we come to the cork piece which is unreal, I don't know what happened but I can critically think for myself and I smell BS. Even if it was true you can imagine it doesn't look good for either side that it happened kinda makes ya think they couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery.

As one of the many disenfranchised citizens in this country their credibility is blown ( not that they had far to fall), looks like the attempted launch will fail again.

Scofflaw

Hijpo wrote: »

Although i was interested in DDI im happy that there seems to be a change in new political parties.

You wouldnt have seen that happen in the other parties, the leaders would have been defended to the hilt. Atleast with DDI a problem was spotted and the members said change it or get lost. It wasnt changed and the members stuck to there guns. I think it shows that peoples heads are in the right place when it comes to politics now, they want tarnsparency, honesty, accountability and communication and if those traits are not applicable parties should not be anywhere near the driving seat of this country. It maight take 4 or 5 new parties to finally weed out all the dodgy bastards but at some point it will be achieved.


hopefully....

Hold up a second - we currently have a group of Fine Gael and Labour splitters potentially forming a new party. The Greens split out Fis Nua under McKenna. Of the major parties, only Sinn Fein and Fianna Fáil haven't had a split relatively recently, and in the latter case they had only just reabsorbed a couple of splits before their disastrous 2011 result. So there's nothing very unique about DDI here.

There are also always party loyalists ready to defend the leadership all the way, and this is also true of DDI, as we can see from the statements being put out by those loyalists, and the defences being mounted by them around Irish social media.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Hijpo

Scofflaw wrote: »

Hold up a second - we currently have a group of Fine Gael and Labour splitters potentially forming a new party. The Greens split out Fis Nua under McKenna.

hold up a second, where is this FG/Lab splitters party an what is the name of the party???

Fr Tod Umptious

Hijpo wrote: »

hold up a second, where is this FG/Lab splitters party an what is the name of the party???

There is a group called the Reform Alliance, or something like that, made up mainly of FG folks who have lost the whip in the past few years, they may or may not become a party in their own right sometime before the next election

Rightwing

I don't hold out much hope for any political party, as soon as they are in, the goal appears to be to fill their pockets asap.

Sierra Oscar

That is a very bizarre media statement to release. I also see that DDI figures have now started publicly attacking the 'splitters' on the Facebook page that I linked to above. That is a sure sign of panic within the organisation. Also, this "we have the establishment on the run" spin is hilarious.

In anycase, DDI is going nowhere fast. It will be hilarious when Gilroy contests the European elections, and a bad result there could mark the end of the organisation - or the end of Gilroy at the very least.

EDIT: Are DDI deleting comments on their FB page? Some people claiming that they are. Surely DDI would not employ the use of censorship?

Hijpo

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

There is a group called the Reform Alliance, or something like that, made up mainly of FG folks who have lost the whip in the past few years, they may or may not become a party in their own right sometime before the next election

First iv ever heard anything of it, and your sure they want people to know about it?

K-9

Hijpo wrote: »

First iv ever heard anything of it, and your sure they want people to know about it?

Lucinda Creighton was on VB recently and the group also opposed the Seanad referendum.

Aidric

Interesting that this thread should be here after I have just watched last Thursdays Prime Time. DDI was mentioned in the report by Rita O Reilly.

I have a strong hunch that Mr Gilroy is a former poster on this forum.

http://www.rte.ie/player/be/show/10215977/

Evelyn Cusack

Even Biggins cancelled his most excellent blog, but thankfully I see he is still involved in the movement.

I hope he brings the blog back , a grea place to infom oneself, you could tell which parts were important as they were in capitals or followed with 5 exclamation marks

FTA69

Scofflaw wrote: »

only Sinn Fein and Fianna Fáil haven't had a split relatively recently

Sinn Féin had a fairly substantial split in Dublin after Éirigi formed.

RandomName2

Scofflaw wrote: »

I'm not sorry to see DDI's facade crack, but not because it removes a potential direct democracy force from the political field - on the contrary, I'm pleased because I've felt all along that DDI were channeling people's genuine intentions into a pit of snake oil and brown stuff, and thereby taking up space that could be used for a real direct democracy force.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Moreover there is now a very significant political vacuum insofar that there a volume of politicians (both hopeful and elected) who are without party. What that may or may not ultimately produce is, of course, still unknown.

Evelyn Cusack

Gilroy arrested this morning according to Steve Kerr - see facebook clipping on broadsheet.ie

General Zod

who'll appear in court, Ben of the Family Gilroy and his Great Seal, BEN GILROY the corporate entity, or Ben Gilroy, who most definitely isn't a freeman on the land?

Will he be using the tactics he advises other people to use in his court appearance?

Hijpo

If it makes him a criminal he now has en even better chance at getting into the Dáil, sure isnt there still a few sitting in the place.
:pac:

His court date is set for 15th of November

Einhard

My God, than Freeman stuff is bonkers, and that Gilroy comes across as a complete charlatan. How on earth can people fall for this nonsense??

For Forks Sake

General Zod wrote: »

who'll appear in court, Ben of the Family Gilroy and his Great Seal, BEN GILROY the corporate entity, or Ben Gilroy, who most definitely isn't a freeman on the land?

Will he be using the tactics he advises other people to use in his court appearance?

Ben Gilroy™

I probably owe him €50k for that.

MRnotlob606

ben gilroy in court for trespassing.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

I cant wait until he starts that freeman crap with the prison staff!

ezra_pound

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

I cant wait until he starts that freeman crap with the prison staff!

I can't wait until he tries the freeman magic when he, er has to pick up the soap.

Robbo

It appears that they now have interesting interpretations of the laws of thermodynamics. The pylon issue can be cured by simply perfecting cold fusion and the liberal use of free energy devices, thus enabling us to bring our entire transmission network down to the scrapyard for cash money.

Hijpo

:rolleyes:

What about lines like "All these things may never happen." and "At the very, very least we should explore these options, we should be open to new and seemingly unbelievable information".

ArmaniJeanss

Hijpo wrote: »

:rolleyes:

What about lines like "All these things may never happen." and "At the very, very least we should explore these options, we should be open to new and seemingly unbelievable information".

Are you saying we should give some credence to BLPs and DrMills claims now, despite them being complete bumkum every other time he has made these claims over the last 30 years.
Because it looks like a standard 'give me more money, I'm making progress' play by a spoofer, really not the sort of thing DDI should be falling for.

Hotblack Desiato

Sounds to me exactly the sort of thing DDI would fall for.

Hijpo

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Are you saying we should give some credence to BLPs and DrMills claims now, despite them being complete bumkum every other time he has made these claims over the last 30 years.
Because it looks like a standard 'give me more money, I'm making progress' play by a spoofer, really not the sort of thing DDI should be falling for.

No, im just saying that i think the article is about not taking the governments and there consultants word as gospel when they say "this is the only way"

ninja900 wrote: »

Sounds to me exactly the sort of thing DDI would fall for.

Oh DDI have history for falling for stuff? Tell us more about the investigating youv done.

Did anyone look into the changes implimented by the members (by members i mean on the ground members not the likes of Ben Gilroy or Ray Whitehead) of DDI since they found out about the dodgy party constitution?

Hootanany

Calhoun wrote: »

The article is pretty much what I would expect from any organisation imploding, all it does is fan the crazy.

I don't buy the whole cloak and dagger storyline, I would have assumed most if not all political parties wouldn't bother their ass infiltrating and trying to destroy the new party from the inside out because there are many more pitfalls out there to stop fledgling organisation (monetary ect).

To use this as the sole basis for having an undemocratic setup or dictatorship if you will is ridiculous, what's worse is the text talking about abolishing it is very wishy washy.

Then we come to the cork piece which is unreal, I don't know what happened but I can critically think for myself and I smell BS. Even if it was true you can imagine it doesn't look good for either side that it happened kinda makes ya think they couldn't organise a piss up in a brewery.

As one of the many disenfranchised citizens in this country their credibility is blown ( not that they had far to fall), looks like the attempted launch will fail again.

They have my vote and anyone else I can convince

humberklog

Hijpo wrote: »

Did anyone look into the changes implimented by the members (by members i mean on the ground members not the likes of Ben Gilroy or Ray Whitehead) of DDI since they found out about the dodgy party constitution?

I read the following pasted post on the 9th of this month and found the writing to be awful and the achievements listed to be vague (at best). I've been keeping a curious eye on how this party was going to evolve over the year.
Since the heave in December and the new board put in place the party's message (and how it is delivered) has become increasingly weird.

---

From the 9th, posted by the new national chairman Jeff Rudd on the Direct Democracy FB page...

Since the National Executive formation, the people placed upon it, informing the media and others as to the new faces and their positions the following in the last few weeks alone has been achieved:

• DDi has gained serious credibility through acting and seen to be so, more professional.

• We are daily operating a lot more with functions assigned and tasks being more quickly carried out.

• Response times to inquiries have greatly improved and the feedback has been then positive.

• One Nation orgamisation (35K membership) is willing open to talk with DDI and has subsequently contacted people on the National Executive.

• Another national industry society has come to DDI and wished to talk.

• A further good number of TD and Senators are now talking DDI serious as a political movement.

• We have been the sole political party invited to a major national even in Dublin.

• Through actual appointed National Executive members and the visibility now established stability, we have not one but two possible to gain Borough opportunities even before the Local elections.

• The main website is now being updated and revamped.

• We have created the opportunities for more policies to be created and additionally submitted.

• The media is willing to talk to us in a more professional and serious manner. An example of this would be the makers of the RTE show “Primetime” who have come to DDI.

• Northern Ireland newspapers recognise DDI as a more legitimate force to challenge the Irish government in the future and are giving us publicity as a consequence of this.

• Negative Internet chatter has died down considerably and others now are conversing with more accurate facts.

• With the likes of news sites such as Journal.ie – the comments left on the site by the public amazingly has been suddenly more in favour of DDI than previously.

• Members of DDI are being followed and listened to by serious people through social media. Journalists, business people consultants, third level teachers, Gardi, staff involved in other essential services and more, are reading about persons on the National Executive then through personal contact, are wishing to further get involved.

• A number of professional organisations have been able to establish contact with established personnel on the National Executive. * Jeff Rudd in communicating Frank Daly, the Chairman of Nama, Phil Hogan, the Minister of Environment, Dr James Reilly, Minister for Health, * Media Executive Kevin Brady in ability to converse with Senator sand other established political representatives.

• We have instigated official inquiries over events that have raised national concern on a number of matters. These include the current state of the HSE ability to maintain its ambulance service, the operations day to day of NAMA, a possible pollution issue that could effect major business and the public, and called through correspondence, for further investigation in regard to certain individuals who are trying to use the British bankruptcy laws to escape possible paying of debts at home in Eire.

• Nationally, Opposition party attacks in the last few weeks have completely deflated directly due to the created 3 page constitutional change to article 14 which gives even greater democracy to the party - unlike the rest of Irelands political parties. DDI's re-written constitution section 17 which now introduces Recall with in the DDI itself, again making it more democratic and far more open/answerable to the people than other parties.

Let keep up the good work.

johnnyskeleton

So, Ben Gilory-ism without Ben Gilroy?

Hotblack Desiato

Hijpo wrote: »

Oh DDI have history for falling for stuff? Tell us more about the investigating youv done.

It's exploitation of the wishful thinking of the gullible, we'd like houses for free just as much as we'd like energy for free, but neither is ever going to happen.

It suits charlatans to support each other, because if they do then they all profit, if they expose each other then none of them profit.

Hijpo

ninja900 wrote: »

It's exploitation of the wishful thinking of the gullible, we'd like houses for free just as much as we'd like energy for free, but neither is ever going to happen.

It suits charlatans to support each other, because if they do then they all profit, if they expose each other then none of them profit.

Not another ren cent and child benefit will not be touched yadda yadda yadda

BlutendeRabe

humberklog wrote: »

I read the following pasted post on the 9th of this month and found the writing to be awful and the achievements listed to be vague (at best). I've been keeping a curious eye on how this party was going to evolve over the year.
Since the heave in December and the new board put in place the party's message (and how it is delivered) has become increasingly weird.

---

From the 9th, posted by the new national chairman Jeff Rudd on the Direct Democracy FB page...

Since the National Executive formation, the people placed upon it, informing the media and others as to the new faces and their positions the following in the last few weeks alone has been achieved:

• DDi has gained serious credibility through acting and seen to be so, more professional.

• We are daily operating a lot more with functions assigned and tasks being more quickly carried out.

• Response times to inquiries have greatly improved and the feedback has been then positive.

• One Nation orgamisation (35K membership) is willing open to talk with DDI and has subsequently contacted people on the National Executive.

• Another national industry society has come to DDI and wished to talk.

• A further good number of TD and Senators are now talking DDI serious as a political movement.

• We have been the sole political party invited to a major national even in Dublin.

• Through actual appointed National Executive members and the visibility now established stability, we have not one but two possible to gain Borough opportunities even before the Local elections.

• The main website is now being updated and revamped.

• We have created the opportunities for more policies to be created and additionally submitted.

• The media is willing to talk to us in a more professional and serious manner. An example of this would be the makers of the RTE show “Primetime” who have come to DDI.

• Northern Ireland newspapers recognise DDI as a more legitimate force to challenge the Irish government in the future and are giving us publicity as a consequence of this.

• Negative Internet chatter has died down considerably and others now are conversing with more accurate facts.

• With the likes of news sites such as Journal.ie – the comments left on the site by the public amazingly has been suddenly more in favour of DDI than previously.

• Members of DDI are being followed and listened to by serious people through social media. Journalists, business people consultants, third level teachers, Gardi, staff involved in other essential services and more, are reading about persons on the National Executive then through personal contact, are wishing to further get involved.

• A number of professional organisations have been able to establish contact with established personnel on the National Executive. * Jeff Rudd in communicating Frank Daly, the Chairman of Nama, Phil Hogan, the Minister of Environment, Dr James Reilly, Minister for Health, * Media Executive Kevin Brady in ability to converse with Senator sand other established political representatives.

• We have instigated official inquiries over events that have raised national concern on a number of matters. These include the current state of the HSE ability to maintain its ambulance service, the operations day to day of NAMA, a possible pollution issue that could effect major business and the public, and called through correspondence, for further investigation in regard to certain individuals who are trying to use the British bankruptcy laws to escape possible paying of debts at home in Eire.

• Nationally, Opposition party attacks in the last few weeks have completely deflated directly due to the created 3 page constitutional change to article 14 which gives even greater democracy to the party - unlike the rest of Irelands political parties. DDI's re-written constitution section 17 which now introduces Recall with in the DDI itself, again making it more democratic and far more open/answerable to the people than other parties.

Let keep up the good work.

Rudd was also on wikipedia, attempting to remove information about some of DDI' more unsavory aspects. After being reverted by several editors, he started claiming he had received death threats and then went onto say:

I state all this knowing that I am putting my life at very risk via other people/supporters out in the real world - and should anything happen to me now or in the future, I wish Wikipedia to notify the Irish Gardi and Interpol as to the events that has occurred here and what might be connected to my sudden death or any injury that might fall upon me. I have already been threatened by phone call prior to this and this matter is being brought to the attention of our Irish police (Gardi) force. I have now made a public similar statement on my own personal website, that my health and welfare might be at risk. I have now notified a number of people to the events surrounding this page and topic should anything happen to myself. .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ADirect_Democracy_Ireland#September_2013_-_content_dispute

He is bizarre to say the least.

humberklog

@Blute, I hadn't seen any of that wiki arguement- thanks for the link.

There's so many peculiarities with this party- the evasiveness to simple questions put on it's official website are just ignored. Huge gaps in the explanation of its mechanics are simply left unadressed as are questions on the previous political affiliations of the new board members and how many people have officially joined this party (not how many likes they've received on FB). There can't be any more straight forward questions as: how many are you? Where are you coming from? How exactly does what your pushing work?

And all the while a simply barking bunch of posts are put out on FB pages and twitter. From extra bike lanes being bad (somehow) to a call for Justin Beiber to be banned. I'm not kidding on either btw.

Most troubling in my view is how often they call posters questioning them Stupid. Once you agree with them, regardless of how crass or nutty that allegiance is shown then all is fine. The same goes for media attention too. A few months back Jeff Rudd was on LMFM, he was vague and...well maybe a little daft sounding. JR promoted the interview via FB. Within a few months he was reporting the same interviewer to the BAI for what he thought was unfair handling of Ben Gilroy. The complaint wasn't upheld.

While some of the members are strongly against Scientology some of them do act a lot like them.

Evelyn Cusack

Direct Democracy itself isn't necessarily a bad idea.
But, as the website and Facebook page confirms, the method of democracy comes second to the fact that it is being used as a platform by those who don't want to pay their debts and who want world class services without paying more tax.

I would have some respect for them if all they wanted to do was instill direct democracy and took a policy neutral position.

Or even if they could explain how to get around the fact that the country is spending much more than it earns regardless of any bailout debt.

Also, Jeff Rudd can barely string a coherent sentence together...

Hijpo

Jeff Rudd is only one man, just like Gilroy. The DDI model is set up in such a way that the party is not controlled by a minority or a party whip like usual lot so whatever Rudd and Gilroy say can be taken as opinions and not mandates or goals.

For instance from the meetings i have been to in my constituency there has been no use of freeman nonsence or talks of complete debt forgivness etc but more achievable ideas like fixing interest rates for a number of years or writing off a percentage of a persons mortgage, rewriting the licences or terms and condtions for our resources and the exploration of them, making third level education more affordable, investigate the bailout payments dont just take it at face value that its ok to turn the debts of private banks into national debt.

Thats my understanding of what the members in my area are about. Some terminology could be wrong like bailouts or write offs etc but you know what im getting at so no need to get anal retentive about it, thanks.

BlutendeRabe

humberklog wrote: »

@Blute, I hadn't seen any of that wiki arguement- thanks for the link.

There's so many peculiarities with this party- the evasiveness to simple questions put on it's official website are just ignored. Huge gaps in the explanation of its mechanics are simply left unadressed as are questions on the previous political affiliations of the new board members and how many people have officially joined this party (not how many likes they've received on FB). There can't be any more straight forward questions as: how many are you? Where are you coming from? How exactly does what your pushing work?

And all the while a simply barking bunch of posts are put out on FB pages and twitter. From extra bike lanes being bad (somehow) to a call for Justin Beiber to be banned. I'm not kidding on either btw.

Most troubling in my view is how often they call posters questioning them Stupid. Once you agree with them, regardless of how crass or nutty that allegiance is shown then all is fine. The same goes for media attention too. A few months back Jeff Rudd was on LMFM, he was vague and...well maybe a little daft sounding. JR promoted the interview via FB. Within a few months he was reporting the same interviewer to the BAI for what he thought was unfair handling of Ben Gilroy. The complaint wasn't upheld.

While some of the members are strongly against Scientology some of them do act a lot like them.

Some of their views are really strange. The two you've mentioned plus also this: http://directdemocracyireland.ie/tag/energy-2/ which is little more than free energy woo. Given their links with the National Health Federation, I'd also expect something about how vaccines are evil and "toxic" and vaccination programmes should be scrapped.
Unsurprisingly the party has generated a lot of discussion on the freeman megamerge thread on boards.

How they deal with the media and people simply criticizing a point or policy is really unprofessional and odd. It makes them look like a bunch of crazies. I also cant fathom why they constantly inflate their membership numbers and support. Unless some elected official defects to them, I can't see them making any gains in the next locals.

ArmaniJeanss

Hijpo wrote: »

Jeff Rudd is only one man, just like Gilroy. The DDI model is set up in such a way that the party is not controlled by a minority or a party whip like usual lot so whatever Rudd and Gilroy say can be taken as opinions and not mandates or goals.

I obviously don't go to the meetings so all I can take as policy is what I see on the likes of the facebook page. If its written by JR and only represents his opinion then you need to re-examine the model, as all I see is bizarre stuff under the DDI banner and assume its the official position.

Interestingly you say that the Waterford branch has discussed 'rewriting the licences or terms and condtions for our resources and the exploration of them'.
Can I ask during such discussions have many people pointed out that a) the current license terms are fair when compared to similar countries at the initial stage of their resource exploration, b) not a barrel of oil has yet been successfully brought to market from an Irish field c) the current lack of exploration rigs off the coast of Ireland (and poor takeup of the last set of available licences) indicates that the exploration companies see Ireland as a longshot at best.

Hotblack Desiato

Hijpo wrote: »

For instance from the meetings i have been to in my constituency there has been no use of freeman nonsence or talks of complete debt forgivness etc but more achievable ideas like fixing interest rates for a number of years or writing off a percentage of a persons mortgage, rewriting the licences or terms and condtions for our resources and the exploration of them, making third level education more affordable

All of those things would cost a lot of money. Who pays?