The rise of the Independents. Did you vote for one? Why?

oscarBravo

Sand wrote: »

If you so distrust Irish people making decisions for the best interests of the nation, why do you argue for giving 3 or 4 of them power to make laws over you with little accountability or oversight?

I haven't argued for that. If you think I've argued for that, it's because you're too busy extrapolating what you've decided I mean to bother reading what I've actually written.

I'm all in favour of the idea of separation of powers, and of the legislature holding the executive to account. But, as I've already said in this very thread, being in favour of something is different from believing that it's magically going to happen.

So, back to what I actually said, as opposed to what you decided to interpret from it: my fundamental problem is with your belief that the average Irish voter is amenable to persuasion through logic and reasoned argument.

Anecdote: I've had several conversations with people who wouldn't like to live close to a cellphone tower. I've explained in detail to them - invoking my experience of wireless communications, and with reference to various laws of physics - that living close to a cellphone tower will almost certainly mean lower exposure to non-ionising radiation, given that it means their handset will transmit at a much lower power. The response is almost invariably: "Yeah, I suppose. I still wouldn't want to live near one."

Another: there's a story in yesterday's Mayo News about the county council's refusal to grant planning permission for a family home on Achill Island, on the grounds that the site has a high water table and is close to the sea, and that the development will impact on the character of the area. The majority of councillors called on the council to review the decision, so it's going to do so. Logically, everyone knows that one-off housing is unsustainable. The council executive - the unaccountable bureaucrats that everyone loves to chastise - operate on the basis of this logic. The county legislature, on the other hand, need to keep their constituents happy.

There's nothing unique about Irish people in this regard. Read Bryan Caplan's The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies.

Zubeneschamali

oscarBravo wrote: »

my fundamental problem is with your belief that the average Irish voter is amenable to persuasion through logic and reasoned argument.

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill

Sand

oscarBravo wrote: »

I haven't argued for that. If you think I've argued for that, it's because you're too busy extrapolating what you've decided I mean to bother reading what I've actually written.

Maybe you could expand your view beyond repeatedly expressing disbelief in any form of governance being possible without the 3 or 4 decision makers I referenced having a rock solid, whipped Dail to rubber stamp their late night, unminuted brain storming sessions without having to explain or evidence them?

A Dail that holds the government accountable is one the government has to worry about. You cannot have the complacent certainty in a government majority you seem to think is absolutely necessary.

I'm all in favour of the idea of separation of powers, and of the legislature holding the executive to account.But, as I've already said in this very thread, being in favour of something is different from believing that it's magically going to happen.

Certainly wont magically happen from returning whipped parties on a rotation every few years. That's why people are voting for Independents. To ensure business cannot be done as usual. Remember?

So, back to what I actually said, as opposed to what you decided to interpret from it: my fundamental problem is with your belief that the average Irish voter is amenable to persuasion through logic and reasoned argument.

And you got a little hot under the collar the last time I asked, but are you an Irish voter? Or are you special?

Anecdote: I've had several conversations with people who wouldn't like to live close to a cellphone tower. I've explained in detail to them - invoking my experience of wireless communications, and with reference to various laws of physics - that living close to a cellphone tower will almost certainly mean lower exposure to non-ionising radiation, given that it means their handset will transmit at a much lower power. The response is almost invariably: "Yeah, I suppose. I still wouldn't want to live near one."

Another: there's a story in yesterday's Mayo News about the county council's refusal to grant planning permission for a family home on Achill Island, on the grounds that the site has a high water table and is close to the sea, and that the development will impact on the character of the area. The majority of councillors called on the council to review the decision, so it's going to do so. Logically, everyone knows that one-off housing is unsustainable. The council executive - the unaccountable bureaucrats that everyone loves to chastise - operate on the basis of this logic. The county legislature, on the other hand, need to keep their constituents happy.

You deride Irish people as not being open to logic and reasoned argument and then you offer anecdotes to support your position? Really?

What you are doing is misdiagnosing the problem - you spot the results, but you think its the voters that are the problem. Not the political system.

There's nothing unique about Irish people in this regard. Read Bryan Caplan's The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies.

Sigh - was there a followup? The Myth of the Rational Taoiseach? I think its funny you believe that as soon as the people and TDs you distrust so much get a ministerial position their IQ doubles and they suddenly become selfless statesmen holding back the hordes of dull morons so they don't need to be held to account by the Dail or have to argue or evidence their policies openly.

I am not arguing for mob rule. I am arguing for strengthening the Dail so it can fulfil its basic role in achieving good government.

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter. Winston Churchill

I think Winston Churchill quickly adjusted his position after meeting an Irish TD.

oscarBravo

Sand wrote: »

Maybe you could expand your view beyond repeatedly expressing disbelief in any form of governance being possible without the 3 or 4 decision makers I referenced having a rock solid, whipped Dail to rubber stamp their late night, unminuted brain storming sessions without having to explain or evidence them?

I might, if you'd stop repeatedly making up positions, attributing them to me, and demanding that I defend them.

What I've actually argued with - I'll save you the trouble of actually reading the several posts of mine you've already replied to - is the idea that the average voter is amenable to persuasion by logic and reason. Rather than defend this idea, you've repeatedly deflected with straw man arguments, so I'll take it that you can't in fact support your assertion.

Sand

oscarBravo wrote: »

I might, if you'd stop repeatedly making up positions, attributing them to me, and demanding that I defend them.

What I've actually argued with - I'll save you the trouble of actually reading the several posts of mine you've already replied to - is the idea that the average voter is amenable to persuasion by logic and reason. Rather than defend this idea, you've repeatedly deflected with straw man arguments, so I'll take it that you can't in fact support your assertion.

You've asserted a position, offered no argument to support it other than *anecdotes* and you believe its my job to disprove your opinion whilst ignoring any logical challenge to your view?

I do partially agree with you actually. Some Irish voters are indeed not amenable to logic and reason.

oscarBravo

Sand wrote: »

You've asserted a position, offered no argument to support it...

Speaking of which: what's your basis for the belief that voters are amenable to persuasion through logic and reason?

Sand

oscarBravo wrote: »

Speaking of which: what's your basis for the belief that voters are amenable to persuasion through logic and reason?

That's just another way of asking me to disprove your own dubious opinion (which you will likely ignore, again), which you still haven't been able to argue *for*. I've addressed the OPs query on why I voted for Independents and the empowerment of the Dail I expect increased numbers of Independent TDs to achieve. At length.

In contrast, you've been unable or unwilling to explain the change you expect that electing the same whipped, incompetent and corrupt parties again and again and again will deliver.

oscarBravo

Sand wrote: »

That's just another way of asking me to disprove your own dubious opinion (which you will likely ignore, again), which you still haven't been able to argue *for*. I've addressed the OPs query on why I voted for Independents and the empowerment of the Dail I expect increased numbers of Independent TDs to achieve. At length.

Yes. And - repeatedly and at length - you've based this view on the belief that Irish voters will vote for unpopular policies if only they're explained to them using logic and reason. That's the lynchpin of your entire argument, and I'm losing count of how often you've gone off on an arm-waving tangent when asked what your basis for this belief is.

I offered anecdotal evidence for this - clearly flagged as such - as well as an entire book on the subject. You waved away the book with a smart-arsed remark, and then claimed that I had only offered the anecdotes.

You, on the other hand, have offered... nothing.

In contrast, you've been unable or unwilling to explain the change you expect that electing the same whipped, incompetent and corrupt parties again and again and again will deliver.

I'll tell you what: when you find a post of mine claiming that electing the same whipped, incompetent and corrupt parties again and again and again will deliver change, I'll address that point.

Now, this isn't an opportunity for you to find a post of mine that you've decided to interpret as meaning the above. I'm not interested in wasting time defending things you think I believe, when you won't bother addressing the things I say.

nice_guy80

I think the parties and people who vote for parties are just scared of the fact independent TDs can make their own minds up on issues and cannot be dictated to by a party leadership.

Each TDs vote counts the same after all.

Each independent will either do well with that freedom, or be seen as irrelevant and voted out.

nice_guy80

oscarBravo wrote: »

What's the basis for that faith?

Past actions of most independents.
Many of them have voted with governments when they supported legislation

Sand

oscarBravo wrote: »

Yes. And - repeatedly and at length - you've based this view on the belief that Irish voters will vote for unpopular policies if only they're explained to them using logic and reason. That's the lynchpin of your entire argument, and I'm losing count of how often you've gone off on an arm-waving tangent when asked what your basis for this belief is.

That's not how representative democracy works. I'm arguing for an empowered, transparent Dail, not direct democracy. I'm not arguing TDs will vote for unpopular positions because they want too - I am arguing that if it is unpopular but necessary then it can be demonstrated and a majority of TDs (not all, a majority) will back it because it is in their own self interest.

The problem you have is you see everything idealistically. There is Good parties, and Bad voters and the Bad voters are all selfish, feckless, lazy, children who don't know what's good for them and punish the poor Good parties for Making The Hard Decisions. I don't see things in idealistic terms - I'm extremely cynical. I don't believe people are inherently good, and I certainly don't believe the government is. That's why I want an empowered Dail - to ensure we are governed in an open and transparent way where they cannot hide their corruption.

Self interest is hardly inimical to the fairest overall option being selected. Indeed, they go hand in glove when there is openness and transparency. Take something as simple as getting an Irish voter to slice a cake, with the only condition being they can only take the last slice. As selfish, feckless, lazy and childish as that person may be they will cut equal slices for everyone because it is in their self interest to get the same share as everyone else.

If we give the Dail the tools and the platform to hold the government to account, then they will. Not because they are Good people, but because it will be in their political self interest to highlight the governments incompetence and corruption.

I offered anecdotal evidence for this - clearly flagged as such - as well as an entire book on the subject. You waved away the book with a smart-arsed remark, and then claimed that I had only offered the anecdotes.

You, on the other hand, have offered... nothing.

Its your dubious opinion to support, not mine. I don't have to support it just because you cant. As it is, thank you for acknowledging you've offered nothing except anecdotes and a book reference. And you did this while deriding Irish voters for not being open to logic and reason. Well argued.

I'll tell you what: when you find a post of mine claiming that electing the same whipped, incompetent and corrupt parties again and again and again will deliver change, I'll address that point.

Now, this isn't an opportunity for you to find a post of mine that you've decided to interpret as meaning the above. I'm not interested in wasting time defending things you think I believe, when you won't bother addressing the things I say.

So don't waste time - clarify your position. Should be easy. You keep misinterpreting my position (see above), so I explain it. That's how a conversation works.

oscarBravo

Sand wrote: »

I'm not arguing TDs will vote for unpopular positions because they want too - I am arguing that if it is unpopular but necessary then it can be demonstrated and a majority of TDs (not all, a majority) will back it because it is in their own self interest.

And I'm arguing, in turn, that their own self interest starts and ends with getting elected. An independent TD who makes decisions that are unpopular with the electorate won't be re-elected, no matter how necessary those decisions are.

That's the nub of our disagreement. You either believe that the electorate will forgive independents for going against their wishes; or that those independents will cheerfully sacrifice their seats for the greater good. I have seen no evidence that either is the case.

Sand

oscarBravo wrote: »

And I'm arguing, in turn, that their own self interest starts and ends with getting elected. An independent TD who makes decisions that are unpopular with the electorate won't be re-elected, no matter how necessary those decisions are.

That's the nub of our disagreement. You either believe that the electorate will forgive independents for going against their wishes; or that those independents will cheerfully sacrifice their seats for the greater good. I have seen no evidence that either is the case.

Grand, and its clear we wont agree. I at least can be pleased that the reform I think is necessary for good government draws closer with the weakening of the whipped parties and the strengthening of the Independents. Business increasingly cannot be done as usual, and that's a good thing.

oscarBravo

Sand wrote: »

Grand, and its clear we wont agree. I at least can be pleased that the reform I think is necessary for good government draws closer with the weakening of the whipped parties and the strengthening of the Independents. Business increasingly cannot be done as usual, and that's a good thing.

We'll see, indeed. I personally think that the required reforms are vastly more fundamental, and that we need to have at least a partial list system as well as empowered local government, and ideally an unelected executive (albeit subject to confirmation by the legislature).

oscarBravo

oscarBravo wrote: »

And I'm arguing, in turn, that their own self interest starts and ends with getting elected. An independent TD who makes decisions that are unpopular with the electorate won't be re-elected, no matter how necessary those decisions are.

That's the nub of our disagreement. You either believe that the electorate will forgive independents for going against their wishes; or that those independents will cheerfully sacrifice their seats for the greater good. I have seen no evidence that either is the case.

There is no forgiveness from the electorate, but in testing times some elected officials have made the tough decisions, aware of what the personal cost is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugailEn8U5o

I do not like what has to be done, but I will take responsibility, take it on the chin, get the unpopularity and lose my seat because it is the only thing we can do to get this country out of the state we are in.

This may of course be an exception rather than a rule, but it is fair to say that we do have some examples of selfless work on behalf of the state as opposed to working to further the self interest of the TD.

This also does assist your point that there is no forgiveness, there is no recovery from making the tough and necessary decisions. The electorate is a cruel, cruel mistress.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Gogarty

(any excuse to post the video tbh! :pac:)

djpbarry

Sand wrote: »

You deride Irish people as not being open to logic and reasoned argument and then you offer anecdotes to support your position?

I don’t think it’s something that’s unique to the Irish electorate - take a glance at the Brexit debate for all the evidence you need of an electorate basing their votes on completely irrational grounds.

Sand wrote: »

What you are doing is misdiagnosing the problem - you spot the results, but you think its the voters that are the problem. Not the political system.

Surely the electorate is part of the system?

heyjude

The various jobs, projects etc being promised to various independent TDs must be galling to backbench TDs in both Fine Gael and Fianna Fail, as they have nothing tangible to show their constituents for supporting them, while the independents get to boast about all the goodies that they have been promised.

Enda Kenny said numerous times during the election campaign "I have no intention of doing business with independents" http://www.northernsound.ie/news/enda-kenny-says-hes-no-intention-of-doing-a-deal-with-independents-to-get-into-power/ and several Fine Gael and Labour TDs likened a vote for independents to a wasted vote. Its not looking like that now, as voting for a FG or FF backbencher seems like a wasted vote, as they get little say but get all the blame.

At least we know now what Fine Gael mean when they say that they have no intention of privatising Irish Water :rolleyes:

piuswal

If everyone who said, pre-election, that they would not work with A, B or C, stuck to that position, we would not have a Government.

The voters dictated compromise by the manner in which they voted. Compromise gave us a Government today and hopefully it will listen to all sides and work together.

nice_guy80

This will be interesting at least

Sleepy

I think the buying off of the independants is a massive backwards step for Irish politics tbh. I thought there was a flood of them this time but if they get even half the goodies they've been promised to support the minority FG government, we could easily see Independants make up the 2nd or 3rd largest grouping in the next Dail.

hatrickpatrick

All of those who are criticising the voting in of independents on the grounds that they are more likely to obey the wishes of their electorate are essentially confirming exactly why independents are superior to party members when it comes to democracy and accountability. Which is just hilariously ironic, really.

Sleepy

You think that parochial backroom deals the independents force the government to agree to in order to continue to govern are good for democracy and accountability?

Short-term, I'm sure it's a great thing if you happen to live in one of the constituencies that elected a bag-man rather than a legislator but inefficient use of public money will only lead to the pie you're claiming a larger slice of than you deserve shrinking. It won't benefit anyone in the long run.

djpbarry

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

All of those who are criticising the voting in of independents on the grounds that they are more likely to obey the wishes of their electorate are essentially confirming exactly why independents are superior to party members when it comes to democracy and accountability.

The problem with that is a parliament is supposed to represent the entire electorate, not just pander to those within a certain constituency.

K-9

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

All of those who are criticising the voting in of independents on the grounds that they are more likely to obey the wishes of their electorate are essentially confirming exactly why independents are superior to party members when it comes to democracy and accountability. Which is just hilariously ironic, really.

The problem is the type of Independent that gets in, but I do have to give them credit for trying to make a difference.

Maybe a list system for Independents would work, not the current system were it would be a railway for everybody.

heyjude

Backbench Fine Gael and to a lesser extent Fianna Fail TDs in the constitencies represented by the high profile independents that have managed to negotiate a deal for their support, must be steaming mad, as the independent gets to bring home the goodies and grab all the credit, while they sit silently in the background, taking the flak for any unpopular measures introduced by the government.

If your constituency doesn't have a government minister, then a high profile independent TD is the next best thing. The cabinet is where all the decisions are made and certain counties seem to have a lock on these seats, even Enda Kenny said when appointing the Minister for the Gaeltacht a few years ago that if he didn't choose someone from Donegal, then they wouldn't be represented at the cabinet, so that admission dispels any notion that Ministers are neutral or don't represent their own consituency / county at the cabinet table. My constituency has never ever had an independent TD, nor has it had a government minister for nearly 20 years, so I'd love for a change to have a local voice that is listened to at the highest levels of government, as opposed to benchbench lobby fodder from the main parties.

nice_guy80

Roscommon finally got a reward for all those Independent TDs they have elected - Fox, Ming, Naughten, Fitzmaurice