Why are Irish conservatives not represented in the media/politics?

mariaalice

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

I am not suggesting a conspiracy. I am suggestion a monopoly.

You know Denis O'Brien owns Newstalk right?

Yes, but you appeared to believe they and RTE have a massive influence when in reality they don't.

They are an irrelevance to a lot of young people traditional social media is not how ideas or formed or disseminated in today's society.

We are not perfect as a society but we are a wealthy western country we are not too bad on equality.

An awful lot of nave gazing going on in Irish society.

IAMAMORON

For me the Iona Institute springs to mind op. I think they are the purest form of conservative influence we have in Ireland, even if they strictly do not have a political bias. I can imagine they have their paws in most of the Irish political pies. They are quite promiscuous politically from what I believe.

I think Ireland would be highly susceptible to nurturing more conservative philosophies. At the heart of our most recent revolution lay many ideologists who (given that they survived the revolution, many didn't) were essentially handed the keys to the lives and fortunes of around 5 million people, basically overnight.

Overtime this had always led to power vacuums. Post revolution societies have always undergone around 100 years of servitude to an alternative "ideal". As I alluded to in my previous paragraph one of the great catastrophes of revolution is the mortal costs of its catalysts' and instigators'. As a consequence, to the victor the spoils. In Ireland's case the Roman Catholic church were given carte blanche. The British government basically washed their hands of Ireland and turned off the economical taps. The remaining Irish leaders ( basically gunmen and a few poets) went running to the church, they had nowhere left to go. The church benefitted by taking over education, health and indeed heavily influencing our constitutional rights, Archbishop McQuaid made sure of that, he wrote the constitution.

We are only in the last 20 years seeing the virtues of freedom and choice stick their necks out. Divorce, Abortion, Sexual rights etc. All these were kept under wraps via church control for 80 years. It will possibly take another couple of generations before the conservative grasp of the church is over.

Personally I hope that a middle ground can be found. Like or love the church I think it does give some sort of moral backbone and belief system that any society needs. It is personnel assessment of such guidelines and rules which really allows for freedom of choice. It is the option of traditional values, rather than the enforcement and coercion of them, that lies the key to a harmonious society. That stands to other non Christian ideologies also. In a world of 1000's of religions, adopting only 1 as gospel must be foolish. All religions basically promote the same values.

It is the wealth of options provided to citizens that present the greatest success factors of a state or society.

AndrewJRenko

Silentcorner wrote: »

Now you are just being petty....

Says the one who objected to Ivan being called a tory because it is a UK term?

Would blueshirt be more palatable?

AndrewJRenko

Silentcorner wrote: »

Irish democracy can't even handle providing a decent healthcare to its citizens, will you go away out of that....or a decent public transport network...or a sustainable social welfare system....

Irish democracy provides the governments that we vote for. We get what we deserve.

Silentcorner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Says the one who objected to Ivan being called a tory because it is a UK term?

Would blueshirt be more palatable?

If it helps you to call him names then ya, at least keep it Irish.

Silentcorner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Irish democracy provides the governments that we vote for. We get what we deserve.

Correct, which is why if it were not for FDI and the wealth that provides we would be a basket case....

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Silentcorner wrote: »

Irish democracy can't even handle providing a decent healthcare to its citizens, will you go away out of that....or a decent public transport network...or a sustainable social welfare system....

If you're supporting a fiscally conservative government, then this is what you're effectively going to get.

Silentcorner

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

If you're supporting a fiscally conservative government, then this is what you're effectively going to get.

Absolute nonsense....countries all over the world provide healthcare, social welfare and public transport for their citizens in a more effective manner than we do....

Yellow_Fern

Acosta wrote: »

News media in Ireland is fairly balanced when it comes to contributors from both conservative and liberal backgrounds. However as far as I can see editorial control usually falls in line with the government. And we've never had a liberal government. Perhaps both main parties are not as conservative as they were, but that's not saying much given what Ireland used to be like for decades. There's a reason many people in the media end up working in FF and FG.

As I said news media is fairly balanced. When it comes to the last couple of referendums it's hardly surprising that the liberal arguments won the day considering they were up against a very small band of well known evangelical catholics. And even though these people failed miserably to convince people in these referendums, the media still wheel the same heads out to discuss many different topics. If moderate conservatives are going to continue to be happy with David, Breda, Maria etc making their arguments for them in future discussions on liberalising law or institutions, then they will continue to lose.

The current gov is liberal in the social sense you mean ie. leftist. They are also neoliberal. In a true sense they are not at all liberal ie classical liberal. We have never had a classical liberal gov. On some many issues the media is totally one sided. No newspaper paper gives a small government point of view, no newspaper presents the argument against universal health care.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Silentcorner wrote: »

Absolute nonsense....countries all over the world provide healthcare, social welfare and public transport for their citizens in a more effective manner than we do....

At a cost to the taxpayer, which is not a fiscially conservative ideal.

Silentcorner

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

At a cost to the taxpayer, which is not a fiscially conservative ideal.

You are confused I think....

A fiscally Conservative Political Party is simply prudent with taxpayers money (in theory)...

So for instance, if you halved the number of jobless households in this state, you could pay for upskilling/educational opportunities for the other half to get them off social welfare and back into the system paying more tax....people will often need social welfare support but the key is to get them back off it.

Young parents are expected to pay crippling childcare costs but Social Welfare provides huge supports for particular individuals who never work....that it not fair in my view.

More people working means more tax...

In other words, the less people who are draining the system the more money you have to provide support or services to those who need it.

Do you ever notice, the more fiscally prudent a country is, the better their public services...like The Netherlands or Germany.

CtevenSrowder

rossie1977 wrote: »

The belief that our law and order is weak is a nationalistic trait.

There are issues sure but one thing we don't want is to turn Ireland into a police state or we have people serving life sentences for non violent crime.

I'd be more than happy for people with 100+ non-violent crimes to be locked up for life.

Eric Cartman

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

I'd be more than happy for people with 100+ non-violent crimes to be locked up for life.

even 50. I can see no way in hell anyone can get 50 convictions for anything and reform to a productive member of society.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Silentcorner wrote: »

You are confused I think....

A fiscally Conservative Political Party is simply prudent with taxpayers money (in theory)...

So for instance, if you halved the number of jobless households in this state, you could pay for upskilling/educational opportunities for the other half to get them off social welfare and back into the system paying more tax....people will often need social welfare support but the key is to get them back off it.

Young parents are expected to pay crippling childcare costs but Social Welfare provides huge supports for particular individuals who never work....that it not fair in my view.

More people working means more tax...

In other words, the less people who are draining the system the more money you have to provide support or services to those who need it.

Do you ever notice, the more fiscally prudent a country is, the better their public services...like The Netherlands or Germany.

Fiscal conservatism to me means either scrap the services or let voluntry workers/charities pay for them; and privitise as much as possible - this would mean transport and as much of the helthcare system as feasible. At least it did when Maggie had the reigns in the UK. Boris has the same ideas, I think, but not the ability. Childcare costs would entail more of a lasissez-faire approach, but perhaps you;re not talking that far conservatism (which is why I asked earlier).

JL555

Silentcorner wrote: »

Is there a single party in this country who willingly discusses

Social Welfare Reform - ending lifelong social welfare dependency
Law and Order - The complete shambles of our courts.
Addressing the Cocaine Epidemic
Addressing the Mental Health Crisis (that doesn't involve spending more taxpayers money)
Addressing the dysfunction of certain Cultural Groups and certain demographics and the implications of their behaviour on our broader society,
Our deteriorating Education Standards.
The coming Pension Crisis.
The huge cost of Gender Quotas being enforced in our Private Sector.
Indeed, has anyone questioned the requirement for Political Parties to sign up to a Feminist manifesto as per our latest election.
Addressing the consistent abuse of public office and the complete lack of accountability and the complete lack of punishment for those who do....
The role the EU has on social issues, ie, the Gender Deconstruction Theory that our kids are now being exposed to in their classrooms.
Addressing the widening gap in job security and benefits between the Private Sector and the Public sector.

Because I'd image a lot more than 2% of us would like to see a much more prominent discussion on a myriad of issues....

I do recall one Presidential Candidate getting into a lot of hot water for touching on one of those issues, he polled a lot higher than 2%.

If there is a Conservative Political Party in this country...I haven't come across it!

There's plenty of cans to kick down the road by those who should be addressing these issues and rest are just too afraid to address them because their livelihoods depend on these issues never going away.

CtevenSrowder

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

If you're supporting a fiscally conservative government, then this is what you're effectively going to get.

How have you come to that conclusion? Have the french, Dutch, German and Austrians never had fiscally conservative Governments?

The Germans, for example, seem to be handling the Corona virus better than most countries in Europe and they've had a fiscally conservative government for years.

Beechwoodspark

I think the conservative section need to form a new right wing party and then start from there demanding access to the airwaves and newspapers.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

How have you come to that conclusion? Have the french, Dutch, German and Austrians never had fiscally conservative Governments?

The Germans, for example, seem to be handling the Corona virus better than most countries in Europe and they've had a fiscally conservative government for years.

That's more down to extensive testing and excellent orgnisation than a fiscal policy.

Netherlands - don't know; Austria is further right, but only recently by political standards, so too early to tell. Are this countries - by strict political devfinition - fiscally conservative? Germany and Netherlands I would have say are more left-leaning than Ireland.

What I'd consider to be fiscally conservative would be something like the US. Generally speaking, this is what it entails.

But again - I DID ask earlier today: how far right are we talking here? It was only really delt with in terms of social conservatism, though.

CtevenSrowder

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

That's more down to extensive testing and excellent orgnisation than a fiscal policy.

Netherlands - don't know; Austria is further right, but only recently by political standards, so too early to tell. Are this countries - by strict political devfinition - fiscally conservative? Germany and Netherlands I would have say are more left-leaning than Ireland.

What I'd consider to be fiscally conservative would be something like the US. Generally speaking, this is what it entails.

But again - I DID ask earlier today: how far right are we talking here? It was only really delt with in terms of social conservatism, though.

Those countries consistently score well in healthcare standards and they've all had fiscally conservative governments. Germany and Netherlands would most definitely be more fiscally conservative than Ireland.

I'd associate fiscal conservatism more with Germany and the Dutch than I would with the US. I can't see how any country that spends 652 billion quid on it's military alone can be considered fiscally conservative. The US spends plenty of money, just in the wrong areas! But as you said, maybe we need a more rigorous definition of what the OP means by fiscally conservative.

Silentcorner

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

That's more down to extensive testing and excellent orgnisation than a fiscal policy.

Netherlands - don't know; Austria is further right, but only recently by political standards, so too early to tell. Are this countries - by strict political devfinition - fiscally conservative? Germany and Netherlands I would have say are more left-leaning than Ireland.

What I'd consider to be fiscally conservative would be something like the US. Generally speaking, this is what it entails.

But again - I DID ask earlier today: how far right are we talking here? It was only really delt with in terms of social conservatism, though.

What I would define as Far Right would be Irish Nationalists, Anti EU...No Immigration...and I don't know what else...I don't even know who they are.

The people of those countries are more fiscally prudent than we are, so their governments, left or right tend to be a bit more prudent than us, they don't seem to have an ingrained welfare culture either...we do, so we need to address it.

AndrewJRenko

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

I'd be more than happy for people with 100+ non-violent crimes to be locked up for life.

What's the cost of locking someone up for life? And how does it compare to better investment in education and housing?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Silentcorner wrote: »

What I would define as Far Right would be Irish Nationalists, Anti EU...No Immigration...and I don't know what else...I don't even know who they are.

The people of those countries are more fiscally prudent than we are, so their governments, left or right tend to be a bit more prudent than us, they don't seem to have an ingrained welfare culture either...we do, so we need to address it.

Can you please stop misreading "how far right" as "far right"...? That's the third time you've done it today and I'm not talking about extreme right.

Also, you said fiscally conservative; not left-wing conservative. Prudence is not the same as conservative.

Silentcorner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's the cost of locking someone up for life? And how does it compare to better investment in education and housing?

Being tough on crime is actually a more prudent approach...

Currently we have a huge industry around supports for kids in vulnerable areas, loads of people employed on good money, several Quangos all offering very little...

Communities who are experiencing significant dysfunction are actually well capable of addressing the issues themselves...it's been done in Glascow I think, early intervention into youth crime is what everyone feels is the right approach, but building a huge and expensive industry around it, not so much.

Allowing a young person run up 10 convictions is madness, what hope do they have of ever contributing to society...another 50-60 convictions won't matter a damn to him...but he will run up a nice legal bill, that the taxpayer picks up!

Silentcorner

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Can you please stop misreading "how far right" as "far right"...? That's the third time you've done it today and I'm not talking about extreme right.

Also, you said fiscally conservative; not left-wing conservative. Prudence is not the same as conservative.

I beg your pardon, I misunderstood.

I don't know how to answer the question to be honest...

I wouldn't like to see a return to an age where one ideology dominates everyone.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Silentcorner wrote: »

I beg your pardon, I misunderstood.

I don't know how to answer the question to be honest...

I wouldn't like to see a return to an age where one ideology dominates everyone.

Me neither, to be honest.

But in the context of the OP's question - Irish conservatices not being represented - there are two branches: socially conservative (dominated by releigion and not representative of most conservative people's viewpoints) and economic conservatism, which is not the same as econmic prudence. You can be economically liberal and still be prudent. It stands to reason, therefore, that you can aslo be economically conservative and still be reckless.

Conservative and liberal, though, are ideologies, broadly speaking. But they should just be used as staarting points. Neither should, I agree, dominate.

2ndcoming

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Me neither, to be honest.

But in the context of the OP's question - Irish conservatices not being represented - there are two branches: socially conservative (dominated by releigion and not representative of most conservative people's viewpoints) and economic conservatism, which is not the same as econmic prudence. You can be economically liberal and still be prudent. It stands to reason, therefore, that you can aslo be economically conservative and still be reckless.

Conservative and liberal, though, are ideologies, broadly speaking. But they should just be used as staarting points. Neither should, I agree, dominate.

This describes the German and Dutch approach a lot better than "fiscally conservative".

Silentcorner

2ndcoming wrote: »

This describes the German and Dutch approach a lot better than "fiscally conservative".

They don't do welfare dependency like we do either....they have a culture that is a lot different to ours.

AndrewJRenko

Silentcorner wrote: »

Being tough on crime is actually a more prudent approach...

Currently we have a huge industry around supports for kids in vulnerable areas, loads of people employed on good money, several Quangos all offering very little...

Communities who are experiencing significant dysfunction are actually well capable of addressing the issues themselves...it's been done in Glascow I think, early intervention into youth crime is what everyone feels is the right approach, but building a huge and expensive industry around it, not so much.

Allowing a young person run up 10 convictions is madness, what hope do they have of ever contributing to society...another 50-60 convictions won't matter a damn to him...but he will run up a nice legal bill, that the taxpayer picks up!

Any chance of some specific details to support your ideas - such as the particular quangos you are talking about, and details of the apparently successful schemes in Glasgow?

Silentcorner

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Any chance of some specific details to support your ideas - such as the particular quangos you are talking about, and details of the apparently successful schemes in Glasgow?

I didn't realise I was in a Dail Committee here...

I know of it through my own knowledge of parts of my city, people who have worked with Community Groups in Glascow, a city that has had huge success in dealing with severe criminality and social dysfunction....

Everything this state touches either costs a fortune, turns to pot, or both in my experience.

Geuze

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

That's more down to extensive testing and excellent orgnisation than a fiscal policy.

Netherlands - don't know; Austria is further right, but only recently by political standards, so too early to tell. Are this countries - by strict political devfinition - fiscally conservative? Germany and Netherlands I would have say are more left-leaning than Ireland.

What I'd consider to be fiscally conservative would be something like the US. Generally speaking, this is what it entails.

I see your point.

The USA is low tax, yet with high deficits under Trump, so I would call that fiscal irresponsibile.

The Germans have higher taxes, but have put fiscal rules into their constitution. So during the last decade their deficits have been low / zero.

I suppose that's a sign of them being fiscally sensible.