fine gael ard fheis ; "lack of protests show the level of support for the government"

Muise...

KyussBishop wrote: »

You don't know what 'patholigise' means (criticisms are not pathologising, and 'FUD' has nothing to do with pathologising), and your own accusation of 'pathologising' is, ironically, exactly what you'd use to try and deflect a disagreement, it's like saying "anyone who disagrees-with/criticises me is just pathologising".

You don't know what FUD means either - which you're displaying once again - making your criticisms inherently wrong; I don't think you actually read my post (since I explain FUD in it).


You've misrepresented what I've said twice thus far, in a way that completely distracts from the entire point of my original post.

oooh tiger! If only there was a protest for you to shout in.

Foxhound38

OldRio wrote: »

At the next election we will all troop through and vote for (pick name of political party) because of their great promises of reform. They have listened to the people and have taken note. A new dawning of political realism and empathic government will lead this country into a new dawn.

Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.

If you don't like what's on offer, form a new party with "realism and empathy" at its core - or run yourself...

It's the beauty of living in a democracy

Fukuyama

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD97yRlUPWs

Recent "protest" outside the Convention Center. Check out the very nice intro graphics and the great editing job - apparently the entire evening was all one big half hearted garda baton charge. Not once did the 'protestors' get out of line.

This is basically why I never attend protests. That and I think, broadly speaking, that FG and Lab have done a reasonable job, given the circumstances.

I've never been oppressed, silenced or had any of my human rights taken away from me; so I've never felt the need to assault guards for no reason while they're manning a pretty standard barricade, the kind of which you'd see in any country hosting an international political convention.

KyussBishop

Foxhound38 wrote: »

If you don't like what's on offer, form a new party with "realism and empathy" at its core - or run yourself...

It's the beauty of living in a democracy

Why did you dive back 2 pages in the thread, to reply to a post from yesterday, that (in between all your other replies since then) you could have replied to at any time?

Why also, is there a constant undertone of condescension, against anyone who points out the lack of protests, or the problems with our countries politics - the message every time seems to be - usually in a very condescending manner:
"Well if it's so important, stop discussing it, go out and do something!"

Except to get that far, people need to be able to discuss it without being shut-down by condescending mud-slinging bollocks - so what have people got against pointing out these problems, and discussing them?


Every time these discussions stray from the 'disparage the protesters' circlejerk, to get to a more nuanced discussion of why and how the lack of protests is a problem, there seems to always be an effort to pull it back to the 'disparage the protesters' circlejerk.

Why deliberately obstruct discussion?

Foxhound38

Dean0088 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uD97yRlUPWs

Recent "protest" outside the Convention Center. Check out the very nice intro graphics and the great editing job - apparently the entire evening was all one big half hearted garda baton charge. Not once did the 'protestors' get out of line.

This is basically why I never attend protests. That and I think, broadly speaking, that FG and Lab have done a reasonable job, given the circumstances.

I've never been oppressed, silenced or had any of my human rights taken away from me; so I've never felt the need to assault guards for no reason while they're manning a pretty standard barricade, the kind of which you'd see in any country hosting an international political convention.

Fcuking idiots couldn't even light a flag on fire properly...

The Gardai acted properly from what I saw on this video, IMO.

dxhound2005

KyussBishop wrote: »

Why did you dive back 2 pages in the thread, to reply to a post from yesterday, that (in between all your other replies since then) you could have replied to at any time?

Why also, is there a constant undertone of condescension, against anyone who points out the lack of protests, or the problems with our countries politics - the message every time seems to be - usually in a very condescending manner:
"Well if it's so important, stop discussing it, go out and do something!"

Except to get that far, people need to be able to discuss it without being shut-down by condescending mud-slinging bollocks - so what have people got against pointing out these problems, and discussing them?


Every time these discussions stray from the 'disparage the protesters' circlejerk, to get to a more nuanced discussion of why and how the lack of protests is a problem, there seems to always be an effort to pull it back to the 'disparage the protesters' circlejerk.

Why deliberately obstruct discussion?

There comes a point in every thread you are in where you go on a rant about how other people make their arguments. You did it with me a while ago. You were invited to bring your complaints to the Mods. To which you responded:

The method of argument that was being used to try and shut-down debate, was subtle enough that it allowed the poster to cast doubt in a dishonest way, while still maintaining credibility in the discussion - this is something the mods can not act upon, because it is difficult for posters to see this method of argument unless it is directly pointed out and dissected, and because it is a subtle enough method of dishonest argument, to fall within the grey area of what mods can and can not act upon.


Which was nonsense then and is still nonsense now.

Protests. People protest when they have a self interest to preserve. The trainee nurses were out this week. They were looking for more money or to keep the money they get already. They weren't protesting for the rights of other workers or pensioners or anyone else. The so called anti austerity protests are usually a ragbag of SWP and Eirigi types who are totally irrelevant.

Foxhound38

KyussBishop wrote: »

Why did you dive back 2 pages in the thread, to reply to a post from yesterday, that (in between all your other replies since then) you could have replied to at any time?

Why also, is there a constant undertone of condescension, against anyone who points out the lack of protests, or the problems with our countries politics - the message every time seems to be - usually in a very condescending manner:
"Well if it's so important, stop discussing it, go out and do something!"

Except to get that far, people need to be able to discuss it without being shut-down by condescending mud-slinging bollocks - so what have people got against pointing out these problems, and discussing them?


Every time these discussions stray from the 'disparage the protesters' circlejerk, to get to a more nuanced discussion of why and how the lack of protests is a problem, there seems to always be an effort to pull it back to the 'disparage the protesters' circlejerk.

Why deliberately obstruct discussion?

Nobody is shutting you down, least of all me - that's sort of the point I was making. The post I replied to was whinging about a lack of choice in political talent to choose from - it's of the "they're all the same" school of thought. My point was that such an argument is moot in a democratic system - if you truly believe that all options are the same and choice is therefore meaningless, then you have the option and the freedom to present something else. Pointing this obvious fact out shuts down nothing, and tis well you know it.

You tellingly mention that the discussion should be framed along the lines of why and how the lack of mass protests is a problem. Is it? Perhaps it's a sympthom, as opposed to a problem. A sympthom that the problems of our society and political system (and there are problems) aren't at the armageddon stage the OP framed it as being. Things are difficult and things could be better, but I'm not being oppressed in anything like an overt or serious way and I'd take a guess that neither are you.

Someone in the thread asked why the protest everything brigade seems to feel the need to ask the rest of us for excuses as to why we don't feel the need to march through our streets with banners roaring slogans like they do - that's the crux of the issue, perhaps we feel that change is better came about some other way, or perhaps we don't feel that incidents like what happened in that video above are a productive use of time or energy in terms of actually achieving things...

Foxhound38

dxhound2005 wrote: »

There comes a point in every thread you are in where you go on a rant about how other people make their arguments. You did it with me a while ago. You were invited to bring your complaints to the Mods. To which you responded:

The method of argument that was being used to try and shut-down debate, was subtle enough that it allowed the poster to cast doubt in a dishonest way, while still maintaining credibility in the discussion - this is something the mods can not act upon, because it is difficult for posters to see this method of argument unless it is directly pointed out and dissected, and because it is a subtle enough method of dishonest argument, to fall within the grey area of what mods can and can not act upon.


Which was nonsense then and is still nonsense now.

Protests. People protest when they have a self interest to preserve. The trainee nurses were out this week. They were looking for more money or to keep the money they get already. They weren't protesting for the rights of other workers or pensioners or anyone else. The so called anti austerity protests are usually a ragbag of SWP and Eirigi types who are totally irrelevant.

Got it in one, my fellow hound! :pac:

KyussBishop

dxhound2005 wrote: »

There comes a point in every thread you are in where you go on a rant about how other people make their arguments. You did it with me a while ago. You were invited to bring your complaints to the Mods. To which you responded:

The method of argument that was being used to try and shut-down debate, was subtle enough that it allowed the poster to cast doubt in a dishonest way, while still maintaining credibility in the discussion - this is something the mods can not act upon, because it is difficult for posters to see this method of argument unless it is directly pointed out and dissected, and because it is a subtle enough method of dishonest argument, to fall within the grey area of what mods can and can not act upon.


Which was nonsense then and is still nonsense now.

Protests. People protest when they have a self interest to preserve. The trainee nurses were out this week. They were looking for more money or to keep the money they get already. They weren't protesting for the rights of other workers or pensioners or anyone else. The so called anti austerity protests are usually a ragbag of SWP and Eirigi types who are totally irrelevant.

Here are my last two posts referencing you in that thread:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88660657&postcount=153
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=88664432&postcount=163

Here is what you were doing in that thread:

KyussBishop wrote:

The tactic he is using to try and shut down debate, is to demand that the only valid evidence of corruption, is a court-case conviction - even when the corruption being talked about, is specifically being talked about because it is not being acted upon (making it impossible for it to have court-case conviction proof - he knows this, and knows full well that continuing to insist upon this, is an attempt to shut-down debate).

This is further bolstered by the tactic, of insisting that the authorities who themselves are responsible for dealing with such corruption, are not corrupt or negligent themselves - with the implication of "the authorities will act upon all corruption, they just aren't informed about it, therefore, 1: the corruption did not happen because they did not act upon it, or 2: *smarmy condescending response, implying you should go to the Gardai to report corruption - implying it is bullshít, and ignoring all cases where this has been done, and has gone unacted upon - see '1'*"


The basic result of every interaction with him, is the insistence: Corruption should not be talked about, until it is convicted (with the added implication that such corruption does not exist, because there is the authoritarian trust, that the responsible authorities would already have done something about it).

He is soapboxing in order to try and distract from the actual discussion of corruption, to pour doubt and muddy the debate - he's not even hiding this either, which can be seen in how he falls back to the above basic insistence every time, only providing the pretence of a debate, to try and retain credibility with other posters (when what he has posted thus far, has removed any need to give him benefit of the doubt at this point).
This amounts to trying to protect such corruption, and protect the idea of inaction against it, by pouring doubt on it and trying to prevent discussion of it.

If you watch his posts, he never actually debates with you: He will give the pretence of a debate, but he will stick with his soapboxing position indicating that he is 'unconvinced' of any/all evidence short of a court-conviction, and will continue trying to dissuade people, implying/criticizing that they shouldn't discuss non-court-case-convicted corruption (i.e. to stop talking about pretty much all types of corruption that matter and are an issue of national importance).

So yes, you were pretty directly soapboxing in that thread, with an argument you knew was dishonest, in order to try and shut-down discussion of corruption.

In this thread, we have a different theme: A circlejerk between posters, which looks like it's a form of soapboxing, for repetitive disparaging of protesters - and trying to drive the discussion away from why the lack of protests is a problem, and towards disparaging of protesters - which you get right down to, at the end of your post.

KyussBishop

Foxhound38 wrote: »

Nobody is shutting you down, least of all me - that's sort of the point I was making. The post I replied to was whinging about a lack of choice in political talent to choose from - it's of the "they're all the same" school of thought. My point was that such an argument is moot in a democratic system - if you truly believe that all options are the same and choice is therefore meaningless, then you have the option and the freedom to present something else. Pointing this obvious fact out shuts down nothing, and tis well you know it.

You tellingly mention that the discussion should be framed along the lines of why and how the lack of mass protests is a problem. Is it? Perhaps it's a sympthom, as opposed to a problem. A sympthom that the problems of our society and political system (and there are problems) aren't at the armageddon stage the OP framed it as being. Things are difficult and things could be better, but I'm not being oppressed in anything like an overt or serious way and I'd take a guess that neither are you.

Someone in the thread asked why the protest everything brigade seems to feel the need to ask the rest of us for excuses as to why we don't feel the need to march through our streets with banners roaring slogans like they do - that's the crux of the issue, perhaps we feel that change is better came about some other way, or perhaps we don't feel that incidents like what happened in that video above are a productive use of time or energy in terms of actually achieving things...

Yes, and choosing now to pick out such a post, when you already have multiple posts replying to stuff since that - and when it's more than a day old; looked exactly like trying to keep the thread framed in a narrow direction (disparaging protesters).


Your post, again, is loaded with presuppositions:
1: That the only way to protest, is to protest like the idiot violent protesters;
1a: Leading from that, that 'protesting' in general, is affected by the same criticisms you apply to violent protesters (no other reason to always cite the totally-unrepresentative violent minority, when referring to protesters);

2: That people are capable of actually independently solving any problems, by entering politics personally;
2a: That people have the time or ability to enter politics;
2b: The previous point, with the way you framed it, also presupposes that people not protest anyway, if they don't have the time/ability for politics;
2c: That entering politics aimlessly, is better than starting a large protest movement - a movement which you need, in order to properly focus on and form the policies and politicians, that will stand for election;
2d: That tiny/marginalized new parties, can make any difference on their own, even if they do put together a decent set of policies and stand for election (as opposed to be being backed by a wider protest movement as well);

3: That we should not protest - that we should settle - until our political system gets so bad it approaches 'armageddon' stage;
4: That we are not 'overtly' oppressed, so we should not protest any issues we do know of;
5: That people complaining of lack of protesting are asking for 'excuses' (nobody has asked for that).


What is your 'other way' of bringing about change? I'd contend, that instead, your real attitude is 'there is no real problem worth doing anything about' - would I be wrong in assuming that?

foggy_lad

Foxhound38 wrote: »

From someone who was there, apparently the violent aspect of the protest turned their anger towards the peaceful groups for not wanting to get involved in their melee with the Gardai and attacked them for not being as radical and cool and revolutionary as them, man. Also apparently that plonker of an MEP Paul Murphy got swung at by an anarchist protestor in the fracas.

What sane or in any way serious person would want to get involved in that?

The fact of the matter is, most - not all, but many - of the krusties at all of these things (and it is generally this same group of around 300 who are persistantly at the core of every protest going) aren't actually interested in changing squat - nor do they have any alternatives beyond simplistic platitudes.

They arrive at every protest because being seen to be anti-establishment is part of their self-identity, and they enjoy walking around down with placards roaring abuse at gardai/delegates/whoever.

*waits for someone to call me a sheep of some description*

Most of them appear to be the same type of poll tax dodging "eco warriors" that were dug in at the likes of the n11 road improvements scheme years ago. All they want is somewhere to squat and live off others until the next protest crops up.

renegademaster

foggy_lad wrote: »

Most of them appear to be the same type of poll tax dodging "eco warriors" that were dug in at the likes of the n11 road improvements scheme years ago. All they want is somewhere to squat and live off others until the next protest crops up.

so where are these eco-warriors squatting exactly??

renegademaster

AllGunsBlazing wrote: »

No need for mass protests when you have a functioning democracy. FG's arrogance will be it's undoing come the next election. Can see it coming from a mile away.

why would they even consider changing a thing if they know the peoples only response is to vote the next shower of corrupt individuals in in april 2016. why are we intent on waiting another 2 years, when more and more extreemly serious corruption comes to the public light as each month passes, it's shocking really and must be quite funny to those at the top that no matter what comes out the electorate dig their heels in and never ever resist.

KyussBishop

renegademaster wrote: »

why would they even consider changing a thing if they know the peoples only response is to vote the next shower of corrupt individuals in in april 2016. why are we intent on waiting another 2 years, when more and more extreemly serious corruption comes to the public light as each month passes, it's shocking really and must be quite funny to those at the top that no matter what comes out the electorate dig their heels in and never ever resist.

The economics author Yanis Varoufakis, did a really good article recently on how Representative Democracy itself, kind of leads to a situation which breeds apathy among the population - particularly in how it leads increasingly, to power over wide parts of society (particularly over economic areas) being removed from democratic control, through privatization among other things.

It's a very long article, and I made a brief thread on it here, and I don't really think his proposed solution is a good one - but it's really informative, for nailing down what the problem actually is:
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2014/02/21/can-the-internet-democratise-capitalism/

twowheelsgood

Many of the callers for revolutions remind me of the various lovely girl’s competitions (at least according to the stereotypes) where the lovely ones would yearn for world peace where everyone would be nice and there would be no horrid wars! Nobody could doubt the merits of the dream the lovelies dreamed, but of course it was more of a challenge to bring such an end about.

There is something similar about those who want a new economic order. You might envision a better and fairer way, but how do we get there? Part of the makeup of our established systems is a robustness to resist attempts to dismantle or reform them.

Mass protests certainly can bring change, though for a rethink of our economic / fiscal ways they surely would have to be global. The difficulty is though that the optimal time for such a protest to gain traction would be in six years ago when the fault lines in our current ways were most exposed. And notwithstanding a few shapes thrown by the Greeks and others, there was nothing like the kind of mass revolting needed to effect change then.

Thus now, with things getting better (or appearing to be, which is what matters!), you really have to be away with the lovelies to think a protest that could bring change, has any chance of getting off the ground, at least before the next major systems failure!

There are undoubtedly many inevitable future events (e.g. the exhaustion of oil resources, or indeed in the longer term, all resources, given our perpetual economic growth model)) or possible events (a loss of confidence in the US dollar) which will force radical new orders. But I don’t think we are, or can be, prepared for all of them.

Perhaps some world statesmen / women, or groups of them, will emerge who will steer us clear of these Armageddon days or perhaps world people power will somehow mobilise and demand as much.
But my feeling is that neither will happen. We will simply sail over the first of these cliffs we encounter and pick up the pieces afterwards.

As an aside, where is all this corruption in the Irish government that the OP seems particularly vexed about?

I can’t say I see so much of what I would call corruption. I can certainly see why some in government might be viewed as bumbling / incompetent or arrogant / aloft, or as even effecting low standards in high office. But corrupt?

Perhaps the word is being used in a somewhat broader way?

KyussBishop

On the economics side of things: The first step there really, is to get the public to actually see the problem - and I think a protest movement would help with this.

Most people don't have the first idea of what standard economic teaching gets wrong, particularly, how it gets the monetary system (money, banks and debt) completely wrong, and that this is essentially what leads to the 'perpetual economic growth' problem you mention, and has directly led to our current economic crisis, and guarantees future ones.

The public has absolutely no interest in any of this either, because it's pretty easy to muddy the debate on economic topics and make people totally uninterested in it - it can be rare to get a civil discussion on the more controversial parts of the topic.

KyussBishop

On the corruption side of things: At the moment I'm reading a book 'The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One' (original here, with more reviews) by the expert criminologist William K. Black, who helped put thousands of fraudsters in prison in the US, in the 1980's 'Savings & Loans' construction boom/bust/crisis.

It's basically the template for our current economic crisis, describing in detail the mechanisms of fraud and political/regulatory capture, that lead to housing booms and busts, and how people profit from that (describing in detail what allowed the fraud to occur, and how the frauds were perpetrated) - and what happened back then, is uncanny in similarity, to the economic crisis today; the same author did an analysis of our own economic crisis, and he basically says that all the signs are there, indicating massive industry-wide fraud - that he thinks there is no other explanation for what happened here.

None of this fraud has been investigated, and there is no sign that it ever will be either - in fact, Irish whistleblowers like Jonathan Sugarman have allegedly been implicitly threatened by the central bank regulators, that if he reported wrongdoing in the financial institution he worked for, that he would be reported to the police.

Add to that, the way politicians were getting significant donations from property developers all in the run up to the crisis, and it all builds up to a picture that looks like there has been pervasive corruption and fraud, and protection of that as well, with regulatory agencies being deliberately neutered, threats to whistleblowers, and so on...


There needs to be widescale investigation for corruption really, to uncover evidence and to prosecute people, and this is what people should be protesting for:
Waiting for proof of corruption/fraud, before investigating for it, is inherently contradictory - you don't have proof of wrongdoing if you don't investigate it, and all the indications are there, that investigations are sorely needed - that's something worth protesting over.

Especially worth noting, is that there has been no reform, exactly the same thing is ready to happen again, so that is - yet again - something else worth protesting over; much of what needs to be done to reform politics/economics/banking/finance, to prevent another crisis, is already known but isn't being acted upon, so we aught to be protesting in favour of reform, just as a matter of self-preservation, before another boom/bust crisis is committed upon us...

Idbatterim

we cant agree on anything though, except that every other section of society shoud take the pain for the most part or that they are all the bloody same (the political parties) The marches against austerity make me laugh, hijacked and attended by sheep, the ignorant and real experts on business and the real world like Begg, Jack O'Connor etc...

The old age pensioners weren't listened to and they had a few marches,

These would be the same pensioners that receive a multiple of what they receive in other countries and are bottom of the heap of any group in society when it comes to any compassion I would have...

In Ballyhea Co.Cork they march on the Cork main road against austerity and also in Charleville.

And what do these future fortune 500 propose as the alternative?

KyussBishop

Idbatterim wrote: »

we cant agree on anything though, except that every other section of society shoud take the pain for the most part or that they are all the bloody same (the political parties) The marches against austerity make me laugh, hijacked and attended by sheep, the ignorant and real experts on business and the real world like Begg, Jack O'Connor etc...

The reason people can't agree on anything, and just advocate shifting the pain around to other areas of society, is because people have (by and large) accepted the standard (and wrong) economic narrative, and don't try to learn more about economics beyond this standard narrative.

People are stuck thinking of economics, in a way that is limited to shifting digits around different parts of the budget, and nudging tax bands one way or the other, and think that this is all that economics is about - instead of looking at wider ideas about reforming the banking sector, the monetary system, how government funds itself, and looking at other alternative ways of getting the unemployed into work.

It's just not discussed. Ever. There's no appetite for it being discussed seriously in the media or at a political level either - not even among the public - from what I can see.

Economics and how economies are run, is probably the most important political topic there is, when it comes to politics/democracy (I think it's the biggest problem within democracy in the world right now) - and people in general know very little about just how wrong leading economic thought is, and how that has helped cause the crisis, is helping us stay locked in crisis, and will cause more crisis in the future.

twowheelsgood

KyussBishop wrote: »

On the economics side of things: The first step there really, is to get the public to actually see the problem - and I think a protest movement would help with this.

If your solution requires that a substantial section of the public (or any!) take any interest in economics at all, much less a curiosity about disparate schools of thought in the dismal science then I think you have an even bigger challenge on your hands than I first thought. And anyway, this is about education, protest is surely about effecting change?

KyussBishop wrote: »

Add to that, the way politicians were getting significant donations from property developers all in the run up to the crisis, and it all builds up to a picture that looks like there has been pervasive corruption and fraud

First, I don’t necessarily believe there had to be fraud in relation to the property bubble (which is not to say that there wasn’t). My take on it was that property developers being generous with their political donations was a consequence and not a cause of the government policies that favoured them.

The property based revenues, not to mention the jobs, that accrued during those years essentially gave FF their hat trick of elections. Had there been outright hostility between the building industry and FF I cannot imagine that political policies would be any different.

Secondly, and more pertinently, how does this substantiate a charge of corruption against the current government? They had no part in any of this at a national level. Are you making the link on the basis of zoning decisions some of their party members might have been involved in as councillors?

KyussBishop

Idbatterim wrote: »

And what do these future fortune 500 propose as the alternative?

The economist I linked earlier, Yanis Varoufakis, has written a complete alternative that can be rolled out for all of Europe - if the political appetite was there:
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/euro-crisis/modest-proposal/

Even while Europe is politically deadlocked, Ireland still has alternatives, like that promoted by Rob Parenteau:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057100005

The alternatives to corruption/fraud are obvious as well: Investigate/prosecute corruption/fraud, instead of protecting it.

There are also a huge number of changes that could be made to running of the economy, in areas of monetary reform, banking reform, regulatory reform; there's no shortage of alternatives, to a huge variety of issues.

KyussBishop

twowheelsgood wrote: »

If your solution requires that a substantial section of the public (or any!) take any interest in economics at all, much less a curiosity about disparate schools of thought in the dismal science then I think you have an even bigger challenge on your hands than I first thought. And anyway, this is about education, protest is surely about effecting change?

First, I don’t necessarily believe there had to be fraud in relation to the property bubble (which is not to say that there wasn’t). My take on it was that property developers being generous with their political donations was a consequence and not a cause of the government policies that favoured them.

The property based revenues, not to mention the jobs, that accrued during those years essentially gave FF their hat trick of elections. Had there been outright hostility between the building industry and FF I cannot imagine that political policies would be any different.

Secondly, and more pertinently, how does this substantiate a charge of corruption against the current government? They had no part in any of this at a national level. Are you making the link on the basis of zoning decisions some of their party members might have been involved in as councillors?

Unfortunately, I'm not sure how the public could get on board with any protest movement or desired changes, without first being educated on the dismal science - so I would not be surprised, if we are still in the same situation as we are now, even in the second half of this century.

Any corruption, is more likely to have been in the interaction between government/central-bank and the banking/financial industry - particularly, rolling back regulations and/or not properly enforcing them.

The most substantial corruption is likely to have occurred within banks and financial institutions, as backed by William K. Blacks analysis of Ireland's crisis - corruption/fraud occurs in the private sphere too.

Sh1tbag OToole

KyussBishop wrote: »

The economist I linked earlier, Yanis Varoufakis, has written a complete alternative that can be rolled out for all of Europe - if the political appetite was there:
http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/euro-crisis/modest-proposal/

Even while Europe is politically deadlocked, Ireland still has alternatives, like that promoted by Rob Parenteau:
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057100005

The alternatives to corruption/fraud are obvious as well: Investigate/prosecute corruption/fraud, instead of protecting it.

There are also a huge number of changes that could be made to running of the economy, in areas of monetary reform, banking reform, regulatory reform; there's no shortage of alternatives, to a huge variety of issues.

I love the way how in when this sort of stuff comes up the lads supporting the current system look for for alternatives and yet pretty much have their fingers in their ears singing the numa numa song while the alternatives are being read out. Then the comparisons to Soviet Russia start flooding in

Politicians the world over want to keep the current system around as long as they can, bring in a few pretend jobs here and there, loosen the links a bit in the complex web of inter-bank debt, bit more tax, bit more bureaucracy, let the next lad deal with it

IrishProd

renegademaster wrote: »

I've said it once, i've said it a thousand times tis a dangerous game the people of ireland are playign by continually doing nothing in the face of blatant corruption etc.

now we see the fact there have been very poorly attended protests or no protests at all over some issues that this is somehow a sign of the overwhelming support for government and all it's $hitty decisions.

what signal are we really sending to current and future governments if we show that we will never ever get angry enough to take back the power??

They are always protests on, it is just that our pathetic excuse for a national broadcaster and most of our media do not cover it, either because they could not be bothered or they are in cahoots with the "powers that be" and help pretend that everything is all hunky dory or simply perpetuate the false notion that Irish people just simply could not be bothered.

Sh1tbag OToole

IrishProd wrote: »

They are always protests on, it is just that our pathetic excuse for a national broadcaster and most of our media do not cover it, either because they could not be bothered or they are in cahoots with the "powers that be" and help pretend that everything is all hunky dory or simply perpetuate the false notion that Irish people just simply could not be bothered.

Then you have Joe Duffy and Boards.ie - people think they have done their duty if they have moaned to Joe or on boards. I reckon no man in Ireland has done more to pacify the people than Joe Duffy, he is worth every cent of his 400k+ wage to the government

KyussBishop

Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »

I love the way how in when this sort of stuff comes up the lads supporting the current system look for for alternatives and yet pretty much have their fingers in their ears singing the numa numa song while the alternatives are being read out. Then the comparisons to Soviet Russia start flooding in

Politicians the world over want to keep the current system around as long as they can, bring in a few pretend jobs here and there, loosen the links a bit in the complex web of inter-bank debt, bit more tax, bit more bureaucracy, let the next lad deal with it

Heh, yes - pretty much; the way things are at the moment, is far too lucrative and provides so much of an opportunity for gaining/wielding power over the rest of society/economies/politics, that alternatives are never going to be acknowledged, until the public is so widely informed about it that it can't credibly be denied any more.

Upon which point, I would say proposals for reforms are likely to be co-opted, in a way that preserves much of the current balance of power - but it will still be progress.

renegademaster

IrishProd wrote: »

They are always protests on, it is just that our pathetic excuse for a national broadcaster and most of our media do not cover it, either because they could not be bothered or they are in cahoots with the "powers that be" and help pretend that everything is all hunky dory or simply perpetuate the false notion that Irish people just simply could not be bothered.

that's well and good but i've read thousands of bull**** excuses from people who were discussing protest before, during and after they happened online so not everybody was in the dark about them.

the best i ever heard was "i'm going to protest against the protestors" lolz