The National Party

Geuze

1.The National Party believes that the territory of Ireland consists of the whole island of Ireland, its islands and the territorial seas.

2.The National Party believes strongly in the principle of a Constitutional Republic, founded on individual personal freedoms, rights and responsibilities. We reject and resist a totalitarianism whose essence is found in the totality of State power and the exercise of State authority, and not the ideological direction of that totality.

3.The National Party believes that the State is the crucible and natural patrimony of the Nation. The State ought not, therefore, be the master of the Nation, but the Nation the master of the State. It follows that the State should act at all times and in every instance, in the interests of the Nation, embodied in one indivisible Irish people. - OK, but what are they getting at here? They mean more than they say.

4.The National Party recognises the centripetal tendency of the bureaucratic State and its inevitable deleterious consequences in the quality and quantity of State level decision making. We therefore believe that a firm commitment to the principle and application of subsidiarity must be a central tenet of Government at every level. - do they mean more power to local government?

5.The National Party approaches our membership of the European Union from the principle of refusing to accept the threatened destruction of our Nation’s freedom, and will endeavour to restore those freedoms which have already, unjustly, been given away.

I don't agree that the EU takes away freedoms? What freedoms?


6. The National Party believes in an aristocracy of achievement within a democracy of opportunity, practised and established economically by the strong advocacy of Free Productive Enterprise. Consequently we endorse the inalienable right to the ownership of Private Property, and shall defend that right against the equally dangerous encroachment of both State Socialism and Monopoly Capitalism. - fair enough......


7.The National Party opposes unrestricted immigration, placing above all the preservation of national identity and culture as the bedrock of a principled patriotism. - most sensible people are against unrestricted non-EU immigration, but as members of the EU, we can't stop 100,000 French or Poles coming.


8. The National Party insists that no law should permit the provision of Abortion in Ireland.

Yes, fair enough, abortion isn't a solution to any problem.


9. The National Party demands a complete reform of our criminal justice system, placing the protection of society from criminality as its imperative value, up to and including restoration of the Death Penalty for particularly heinous crimes.

AFAIK, death penalty is incompatible with EU membership?


It's a no from me, as I support EU membership.

BarnardsLoop

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Oh but sure didn't you hear? All the aborted foetuses are going to be conscripted into an EU army and paid a new minimum wage of €1.84!

No, I haven't forgotten about the frankly laughable crap Europhobes came out with at the time.

Tbf the lisbon treaty,did lead to an erosion of workers rights,pay and conditions

Wouldnt dismiss these concerns out of hand

BarnardsLoop

Gradius wrote: »

Hyperbole aside, I'm quite curious as to logical endpoints in how people think.

It's easy to laugh and jeer about things in theoretical terms

It's easy to laugh and jeer about things when they're shown to be pathetic lies, too.

but brexit is a very real thing that happened and with very real consequences that won't be known for a long time.

So jeering aside, what do you think is the outcome of this increasing social unrest?

Do you imagine it's all going to go away for some reason in like 10 years? I don't. Just about any metric you care to think about points to momentum in chaos.

The mindset of laughing nervously at things beginning to crumble all about you, dismissing it out of hand, is a bit mad to me.

Who's nervous? And what's crumbling all about me? Forgive me for maybe jumping the gun here but you've yet to establish that "things are beginning to crumble".

Ultimately, what I fear as the result of increasing social unrest is a repeat incident of people looking for an easy ethnic group to scapegoat while dictators capitalise on that by brutalising them.

Hey, plenty enough people on this forum seem absolutely sure that any day now the walls are going to come tumbling down and the Saracens come riding in to destroy us.

piplip87

There's room for a right wing economic party in this country. Ones that will tackle the growing amount of people who expect the government to feed, house, and raise their kids while they sit on their holes moaning about why 24% isn't a majority.

I'd also be in favour of a points based emigration system from countries outside the EU and an end to Direct Provision whereby we will help those fleeing warzones and get rid of the chancers. I'd also be in favour of reporting those who don't stick to the rule of law.

What we need is an open honest discussion at a national level about immigration. I have been shot down on other forms as a racist because if my views. I am not racist I'm in favour of sensible restrictions and not having to force people to endure direct provision while in essentially limbo.

They anti EU crap doesn't appeal to me either. It has brought far more benefits than what we have given. I am concerned about the Apple Ruling though the EU should not have the right to dictate Ireland's Tax Affairs.

Barret and the NP are lunatics but if peoples genuine concerns are not addressed they will see more people joining.

Gradius

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

It's easy to laugh and jeer about things when they're shown to be pathetic lies, too.



Who's nervous? And what's crumbling all about me? Forgive me for maybe jumping the gun here but you've yet to establish that "things are beginning to crumble".

Ultimately, what I fear as the result of increasing social unrest is a repeat incident of people looking for an easy ethnic group to scapegoat while dictators capitalise on that by brutalising them.

Hey, plenty enough people on this forum seem absolutely sure that any day now the walls are going to come tumbling down and the Saracens come riding in to destroy us.

Lies or not, half-truths or not, society is evidently unhappy.

"What's crumbling about me?" Normality, I suppose. Brexit, Trump, far right, far left, street violence, protests, riots etc. All over the world. To laugh and jeer in the face of such reality simply requires a nervous disposition.

Your words are "I fear scapegoats..." Well, on this trajectory, that's 100% guaranteed.

So to my overall point, besides pointing at people and laughing, what do you propose is going to end all of this? Or do you accept that society is simply imploding and that's all there is to it?

To add, aggravating people who are already aggravated doesn't seem very intelligent. It is essentially "arguing" for the status quo, and it is the status quo that is turning people violent in the first place.

BarnardsLoop

Gradius wrote: »

Lies or not, half-truths or not, society is evidently unhappy.

I'd say it's of critical importance if society is unhappy because of lies. Can't really assuage someone's fears if those fears have no basis in reality, after all.

"What's crumbling about me?" Normality, I suppose. Brexit, Trump, far right, far left, street violence, protests, riots etc. All over the world. To laugh and jeer in the face of such reality simply requires a nervous disposition.

I only laugh and jeer at the grifters peddling lies and the weak minds that believe them. If a man tells you the Earth is flat, do you start worrying or do you laugh at his stupidity?

Your words are "I fear scapegoats..." Well, on this trajectory, that's 100% guaranteed.

So to my overall point, besides pointing at people and laughing, what do you propose is going to end all of this? Or do you accept that society is simply imploding and that's all there is to it?

To add, aggravating people who are already aggravated doesn't seem very intelligent. It is essentially "arguing" for the status quo, and it is the status quo that is turning people violent in the first place.

What do I think? Well, if societies start going the way of Poland and Hungary have then there's really no hope. Nothing I say or do will change that. After all, I'm just one person. But to take the view of someone who once capitalised on these kinds of fears:

Only one danger could have jeopardised this development — if our adversaries had understood its principle, established a clear understanding of our ideas, and not offered any resistance. Or, alternatively, if they had from the first day annihilated with the utmost brutality the nucleus of our new movement.

So at this juncture, I doubt much can be done.

CtevenSrowder

[QUOTE=BarnardsLoop;113856487


I only laugh and jeer at the grifters peddling lies and the weak minds that believe them. If a man tells you the Earth is flat, do you start worrying or do you laugh at his stupidity?

[/QUOTE]

No, you ask him why he thinks this, and then counter his points whilst showing him the evidence as to why it is globular. Laughing at them doesn't help anything.

Gradius

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

I'd say it's of critical importance if society is unhappy because of lies. Can't really assuage someone's fears if those fears have no basis in reality, after all.



I only laugh and jeer at the grifters peddling lies and the weak minds that believe them. If a man tells you the Earth is flat, do you start worrying or do you laugh at his stupidity?



What do I think? Well, if societies start going the way of Poland and Hungary have then there's really no hope. Nothing I say or do will change that. After all, I'm just one person. But to take the view of someone who once capitalised on these kinds of fears:



So at this juncture, I doubt much can be done.

The important point is that absolute lies go nowhere without unhappiness. Interpretations of truth gain a strong foothold when there is existing unrest, like now.

Add in "observed reality" to it, and it's a wrap.

It's all well and good to talk about living peaceably alongside an heretofore foreigner, when the reported news readily demonstrates those same foreigners detonate a bomb in a concert that your children may have attended.

It's all well and good to talk about re-educating yourself to live alongside a foreigner. It's different in reality when demands are put on you to adjust your heretofore normal life that requires extra effort that wasn't needed before, and that's not including the oftentimes chastisement that comes with it.

And so forth. In other words, the theories are all lovely, but the realities are the opposite. So when it comes down to growing frustration, the obvious answer is to "get rid" of the problem. It doesn't take much to channel that frustration with some embellished truth.

So, my conclusion is that the inevitable is at hand.one need only look about to see the living proof.

Lastly, you say "if societies go the way of Poland and Hungary...", Well, the clear example is Poland and Hungary itself. They changed. And every other country is going the same way at a remarkable pace.

People better start offering solutions instead of theories, double quick. laughing only makes things move quicker in the opposite direction. And I'll tell you what, I haven't seen one single solution offered by any established party, hence their decimation.

When a bloke is going mad about his house on fire, offering more petrol isn't going to calm him down.

Loafing Oaf

Gradius wrote: »

I haven't seen one single solution offered by any established party, hence their decimation.

What? When did this happen?

Gradius

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

What? When did this happen?

Deliberate misinterpretation is not funny.

Look at many other countries for the answer. Then look here and ask yourself "will we be the exceptions, and why?"

BarnardsLoop

When a bloke is mad that his house is on fire and attempting to point out that only a couple of the chairs are singed only results in him even more angrily insisting that no, his house really is on fire... At that point you're dealing with delusion, not reality.

Laughing doesn't help but less so than indulging the delusion.

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

No, you ask him why he thinks this, and then counter his points whilst showing him the evidence as to why it is globular. Laughing at them doesn't help anything.

And if his beliefs are such that any attempts to present evidence that contradict them result in him labelling it as propaganda or otherwise falsified? Because that's quite a common theme among conspiracy theorists; whatever group is orchestrating the conspiracy is also powerful/wealthy/connected/whatever enough that it can falsify evidence.

Laughing at them doesn't help, no, but past a point there's little else you can do aside from give up and accept what's happening.

joe40

People calling for a right wing party?
What does that even mean. I always understood right wing to be pro capitalism now it seems to be anti immigration, pro nationalism, anti welfare, anti abortion, anti LGBT, the list goes on depending on who you are listening to.

As it stands the national party are nowhere near mainstream.

Loafing Oaf

Gradius wrote: »

Then look here and ask yourself "will we be the exceptions, and why?"

We seem to be so far, and we've had significant immigration for a while now.

Gradius

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

When a bloke is mad that his house is on fire and attempting to point out that only a couple of the chairs are singed only results in him even more angrily insisting that no, his house really is on fire... At that point you're dealing with delusion, not reality.

Laughing doesn't help but less so than indulging the delusion.



And if his beliefs are such that any attempts to present evidence that contradict them result in him labelling it as propaganda or otherwise falsified? Because that's quite a common theme among conspiracy theorists; whatever group is orchestrating the conspiracy is also powerful/wealthy/connected/whatever enough that it can falsify evidence.

Laughing at them doesn't help, no, but past a point there's little else you can do aside from give up and accept what's happening.

Okay, to distill the problem of reality versus theory, let's take a very simple example; housing.

Put yourself in two positions, one being a family that is struggling to afford a home (or council house, whatever), the other being the government that's supposed to be looking out for this family.

When the family sees/hears an obviously foreign family moved into a council home ahead of them...what message does that send to the family? The obvious is that "those foreign people are getting cared for by the government instead/ahead of me". There's all sorts of detail missing of course, but that's observed reality.

As the government, what can they do or say about it to placate the family?

How do you sell that idea as a positive? There's no point saying you'll build more homes when at the same time there's no end to immigration. It becomes a perpetually unsolvable problem. And the more it's observed, the more the frustration grows.

BarnardsLoop

Some people mean an ordinary (socially, economically, or both) right-wing party. Others mean, well to not beat around the bush, a fascist strongman who'll cleans society of the "degnerates" and the "invaders" and "those who would thwart our destiny".

But the problem is a rather simple one: Irish people weren't always considered 'white'. It doesn't even have any basis in biology, given how it has arbitrarily expanded and contracted throughout history to include or exclude groups of people who, today, most people would call white. And what was given can absolutely be taken away.

Because... What happens when you get rid of the "degenerates"? Of the "invaders"? Of every scapegoat that's been blamed for society's ills? Well, ultimately, society's ills aren't suddenly, magically fixed. Such societies typically have much deeper problems than can be so simply explained away. But the fascist, having only one trick, has to now find a new scapegoat to blame for the continued degradation of society. So people who were once considered 'white' are now not or are considered not 'white' enough. And on it goes, spiralling downwards into a smaller and smaller group of people considered 'white' until eventually it either implodes, or more usually, the group of people no longer considered 'white' outnumber those who are.

Which is why I find its popularity among people here so perplexing; do none of you think that when the time comes, you too won't be sacrificed at the altar of racial purity? Because believe me, if it comes to that, none of us will be safe. Maybe for a time but only until we outlive our usefulness to them.

Remember, this: Was how Irish people were depicted in the UK magazine Punch, as late as the nineteenth century.

If you support people like that, then know that you're nothing more than a 'useful idiot' to them.

CtevenSrowder

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Some people mean an ordinary (socially, economically, or both) right-wing party. Others mean, well to not beat around the bush, a fascist strongman who'll cleans society of the "degnerates" and the "invaders" and "those who would thwart our destiny".

But the problem is a rather simple one: Irish people weren't always considered 'white'. It doesn't even have any basis in biology, given how it has arbitrarily expanded and contracted throughout history to include or exclude groups of people who, today, most people would call white. And what was given can absolutely be taken away.

Because... What happens when you get rid of the "degenerates"? Of the "invaders"? Of every scapegoat that's been blamed for society's ills? Well, ultimately, society's ills aren't suddenly, magically fixed. Such societies typically have much deeper problems than can be so simply explained away. But the fascist, having only one trick, has to now find a new scapegoat to blame for the continued degradation of society. So people who were once considered 'white' are now not or are considered not 'white' enough. And on it goes, spiralling downwards into a smaller and smaller group of people considered 'white' until eventually it either implodes, or more usually, the group of people no longer considered 'white' outnumber those who are.

Which is why I find its popularity among people here so perplexing; do none of you think that when the time comes, you too won't be sacrificed at the altar of racial purity? Because believe me, if it comes to that, none of us will be safe. Maybe for a time but only until we outlive our usefulness to them.

Remember, this:
If you support people like that, then know that you're nothing more than a 'useful idiot' to them.

Honestly, I really think you overstate the number of racists and far-rightists in CA. They are a tiny minority.

BarnardsLoop

Gradius wrote: »

Okay, to distill the problem of reality versus theory, let's take a very simple example; housing.

Put yourself in two positions, one being a family that is struggling to afford a home (or council house, whatever), the other being the government that's supposed to be looking out for this family.

When the family sees/hears an obviously foreign family moved into a council home ahead of them...what message does that send to the family? The obvious is that "those foreign people are getting cared for by the government instead/ahead of me". There's all sorts of detail missing of course, but that's observed reality.

As the government, what can they do or say about it to placate the family?

Well obviously they need to build more social housing. Which is what plenty of people here have been saying for a long time now. The failure to do so isn't part of some plot to import foreigners and wipe us out, though.

There are far more banal but no less insidious reasons for that, mostly resulting from corruption and vested interests. Blaming immigrants is just looking for a simple scapegoat rather than confronting the harsh reality of continuing to vote in governments that won't deliver on their promises to build more social housing.

How do you sell that idea as a positive? There's no point saying you'll build more homes when at the same time there's no end to immigration. It becomes a perpetually unsolvable problem. And the more it's observed, the more the frustration grows.

Well, the uncomfortable fact that too many people don't want to face is that it's mostly a product of the massive, practically cartoonish level of wealth inequality in the world.

It's a bit like Ursula K. Le Guin's famous short-story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas; our wealth, in the West, is built on the back of suffering of so many people. Now personally I can't really fault those people for wanting to seek out a better life for themselves. After all, didn't Irish people do the same during the Famine? And didn't they face terrible discrimination because they were seen as barbarians invading America?

There won't be an end to immigration until people no longer have need to emigrate.

Gradius

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

We seem to be so far, and we've had significant immigration for a while now.

If you bothered to draw a graph of the indigenous/non-indigenous population of an area or country, I'm sure there would be a very distinct relationship with the degree of social upheaval.

In fact I'd bet you could draw baseline predictions. Indigenous population above 90%? No problems.

80%? The start of unrest and grumbling.

What I'm interested to see is the point of complete breakdown, which the United States will provide in due course. At what percentage does complete chaos/radical change take place? 50%?

Ireland is undergoing a practically unparalleled demographic change. If I remember correctly the government plan is to have the population of Ireland increase by at least an extra million people by 2040. So, roughly 25%.

We haven't seen the political changes here yet because of this rapidity, but it will no doubt catch up.

To better account of such a change, imagine an extra 100 million people moving into the United States in less than half a generation. If the place wasn't hanging over a cliff already all ready, imagine that extra impact.

ArchXStanton

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Yeah, just look at the likes of Viktor Orbán or Prawo i Sprawiedliwość in Poland. They're turned their respective nations into laughing stocks and that's what we really need here!

How many terrorist attacks or racially/religious motivated incidents in those countries?... If anything they're p!ssing themselves laughing at the idiocy of the rest of the EU... Of course they have to demonised for it...

BarnardsLoop

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Honestly, I really think you overstate the number of racists and far-rightists in CA. They are a tiny minority.

Going by what I've seen elsewhere and how they operate... I doubt it. Their most insidious tactic is to couch their objections in seemingly reasonable terms. And that they appeal to things like LGBT rights or women's rights but then turn around and start insulting those same groups, revealing their true intentions.

After all, the term 'alt-right' was coined by the American white-nationalist Richard Spencer precisely as a euphemism for people like himself. They know that their old arguments have been cottoned on to.

I'm reluctant to bring this up but... a lot of the talk about 'globalists' being a by-word for Jews came from their use of the triple parentheses around the word. But only the slowest of them still use those. My point being that they always seek out euphemistic terms for their targets. They're careful to play into peoples' fears just enough to give themselves plausible deniability.
The one thing they can't do, however, is change the core of the arguments; Jews are not 'us', they want to destroy 'us', they want to overthrow 'us', they want to outbreed 'us'. The prejudice is as old as the hills, just the terminology has changed.

Hell, even today there's still debates over whether Jewish people are 'white'. Which just further demonstrates how meaningless the term is.

If you're expecting them to, like the Nazis, come straight out and start talking about how Jewish people are the cause of all our ills... that's being a little naive. They've learned from that past. Antisemitism was rife in Europe at the time and so it was fair-game to talk about Jewish people like that but nowadays they have to be careful.

But there are certain targets that they can still be open about. That prejudice against is seen as acceptable.

Gradius

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Well obviously they need to build more social housing. Which is what plenty of people here have been saying for a long time now. The failure to do so isn't part of some plot to import foreigners and wipe us out, though.

There are far more banal but no less insidious reasons for that, mostly resulting from corruption and vested interests. Blaming immigrants is just looking for a simple scapegoat rather than confronting the harsh reality of continuing to vote in governments that won't deliver on their promises to build more social housing.



Well, the uncomfortable fact that too many people don't want to face is that it's mostly a product of the massive, practically cartoonish level of wealth inequality in the world.

It's a bit like Ursula K. Le Guin's famous short-story The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas; our wealth, in the West, is built on the back of suffering of so many people. Now personally I can't really fault those people for wanting to seek out a better life for themselves. After all, didn't Irish people do the same during the Famine? And didn't they face terrible discrimination because they were seen as barbarians invading America?

There won't be an end to immigration until people no longer have need to emigrate.

Well that's just it, isn't it? The fact on the ground, the reality, is that these political parties aren't solving anything.

When local Joe is screwed over by housing, yet sees with his own eyes that non Irish people are being given homes for free, the result is inevitable.

These current political parties ushered in a new world for ireland, so to speak.in doing so, they have rendered themselves obsolete going forward. They are no longer fit for purpose as the world they grew out of slowly disappears.

Hence, new political parties will gradually gain power. The same way it's happening elsewhere.

BarnardsLoop

Maybe. Every far-right party that's tried to set up here has failed miserably. Hell, even the likes of the PDs failed. Then you have the alphabet soup on the other side who're just as politically irrelevant.

Could things change? Absolutely. But then anything could happen. Personally, I'm not entirely convinced the appetite exists here for extremist political parties.

CtevenSrowder

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Going by what I've seen elsewhere and how they operate... I doubt it. Their most insidious tactic is to couch their objections in seemingly reasonable terms. And that they appeal to things like LGBT rights or women's rights but then turn around and start insulting those same groups, revealing their true intentions.

After all, the term 'alt-right' was coined by the American white-nationalist Richard Spencer precisely as a euphemism for people like himself. They know that their old arguments have been cottoned on to.

I'm reluctant to bring this up but... a lot of the talk about 'globalists' being a by-word for Jews came from their use of the triple parentheses around the word. But only the slowest of them still use those. My point being that they always seek out euphemistic terms for their targets. They're careful to play into peoples' fears just enough to give themselves plausible deniability.
The one thing they can't do, however, is change the core of the arguments; Jews are not 'us', they want to destroy 'us', they want to overthrow 'us', they want to outbreed 'us'. The prejudice is as old as the hills, just the terminology has changed.

Hell, even today there's still debates over whether Jewish people are 'white'. Which just further demonstrates how meaningless the term is.

If you're expecting them to, like the Nazis, come straight out and start talking about how Jewish people are the cause of all our ills... that's being a little naive. They've learned from that past. Antisemitism was rife in Europe at the time and so it was fair-game to talk about Jewish people like that but nowadays they have to be careful.

But there are certain targets that they can still be open about. That prejudice against is seen as acceptable.

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said, but the number of posters who go along with that ideology is really, really small. Just look at the National Party thread where essentially zero people have shown support for it, bar the OP. I'm sure there are some, just not as many as you seem to believe.

Anyway I'll leave it there. I'll return the favour and give you the last word this time

CtevenSrowder

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Going by what I've seen elsewhere and how they operate... I doubt it. Their most insidious tactic is to couch their objections in seemingly reasonable terms. And that they appeal to things like LGBT rights or women's rights but then turn around and start insulting those same groups, revealing their true intentions.

After all, the term 'alt-right' was coined by the American white-nationalist Richard Spencer precisely as a euphemism for people like himself. They know that their old arguments have been cottoned on to.

I'm reluctant to bring this up but... a lot of the talk about 'globalists' being a by-word for Jews came from their use of the triple parentheses around the word. But only the slowest of them still use those. My point being that they always seek out euphemistic terms for their targets. They're careful to play into peoples' fears just enough to give themselves plausible deniability.
The one thing they can't do, however, is change the core of the arguments; Jews are not 'us', they want to destroy 'us', they want to overthrow 'us', they want to outbreed 'us'. The prejudice is as old as the hills, just the terminology has changed.

Hell, even today there's still debates over whether Jewish people are 'white'. Which just further demonstrates how meaningless the term is.

If you're expecting them to, like the Nazis, come straight out and start talking about how Jewish people are the cause of all our ills... that's being a little naive. They've learned from that past. Antisemitism was rife in Europe at the time and so it was fair-game to talk about Jewish people like that but nowadays they have to be careful.

But there are certain targets that they can still be open about. That prejudice against is seen as acceptable.

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said, but the number of posters who go along with that ideology is really, really small. Just look at the National Party thread where essentially zero people have shown support for it, bar the OP. I'm sure there are some, just not as many as you seem to believe.

Anyway I'll leave it there. I'll return the favour and give you the last word this time

Gradius

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Maybe. Every far-right party that's tried to set up here has failed miserably. Hell, even the likes of the PDs failed. Then you have the alphabet soup on the other side who're just as politically irrelevant.

Could things change? Absolutely. But then anything could happen. Personally, I'm not entirely convinced the appetite exists here for extremist political parties.

I don't think that exceptional mode of thinking works anywhere to be honest.

Again I would say that the sole reason that nationalist parties have only appeared very recently is directly tied to the rapid rate of change.

I think the most "interesting" time ahead for ireland is when the children of these immigrants grow up. Anecdotally, there are some classrooms and schools that are majority non native, and the sudden appearance of such change (adults versus children) will probably come as a real shock to most people.

BarnardsLoop

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

I don't necessarily disagree with anything you said, but the number of posters who go along with that ideology is really, really small. Just look at the National Party thread where essentially zero people have shown support for it, bar the OP. I'm sure there are some, just not as many as you seem to believe.

Anyway I'll leave it there. I'll return the favour and give you the last word this time

Ah, its not so much a political party I fear as radicalistion of individuals.

But, if I must have the last word then I'll just apologise for my behaviour towards you on the other threads. I'll be the first to say I sometimes speak impetuously. I was angry and I jumped the gun on you, so to speak, and for that I'm sorry.

Gradius wrote: »

I don't think that exceptional mode of thinking works anywhere to be honest.

Again I would say that the sole reason that nationalist parties have only appeared very recently is directly tied to the rapid rate of change.

I think the most "interesting" time ahead for ireland is when the children of these immigrants grow up. Anecdotally, there are some classrooms and schools that are majority non native, and the sudden appearance of such change (adults versus children) will probably come as a real shock to most people.

I had a really long reply written out because I think you raise some interesting points but I accidentally refreshed the page and am just feeling a bit miffed to start all over again right now.

Suffice to say, for now, that historically we've mostly experienced net emigration so I understand immigration is a new phenomenon for a lot of people here.

Galwayguy35

I don't think anyone is looking for an extremist party, but the way things are at the moment is not acceptable either where immigration isn't up for discussion at all by any of the political parties which is baffling because the system we have just is not working.

There is no political will to put a system in place where there is a quick turnaround at the airport once the immigrants story is heard and if they think its bullsh1it put them on the next flight back.

Same with lads arriving on trucks, set up a detention centre to hold them until arrangemants have been made and send them back ASAP.

The Black Oil

Barrett said something to the effect that Hazel Chu isn't ethnically Irish. Would have liked to hear him being asked about whether he believes Paul McGrath is Irish.

Mr. Karate

coinop wrote: »

Is it not in the interest of democracy to have alternatives? FF/FG/SF/Labour/Greens are all singing from the same hymn sheet. They're all pro-EU, pro-gay marriage, pro-abortion, pro-mass immigration. Choice is an illusion in Irish politics. For years voters have complained that "they're all the same" which is true, but now we have more complainers whinging that we have a choice. There has traditionally been no ideological basis in Irish politics due to the two main parties having their roots in the Civil War divide over the issue of partition. The National Party are here to change that.

For better or worse gay marriage and abortion are legal now. National party should focus soley on mass open borders immigration that the established parties clearly embrace. There are many on the Left that are just as concerned about mass immigration from the 3rd world and the skyrocketing crimes rates that accompany it. If the NP wants to get anywhere they're going to have to appeal to people on the Left that still have a foothold in reality and sanity.

Eric Cartman

joe40 wrote: »

People calling for a right wing party?
What does that even mean. I always understood right wing to be pro capitalism now it seems to be anti immigration, pro nationalism, anti welfare, anti abortion, anti LGBT, the list goes on depending on who you are listening to.

As it stands the national party are nowhere near mainstream.

A ti abortion anti lgbt can happen on the left too but is usually the oreserve of the extremist right, nobody is calling for that kind of party.

People are calling for lower taxes, lower welfare, immigration control etc.. which are gery moderate right views to hold

lawred2

coinop wrote: »

Let's have a thread about Ireland rather than America for a change. Founded in November 2016, the National Party was founded by Justin Barrett and his old friend James Reynolds. The two men had been involved in pro-life activism as teenagers and Barrett got a taste of the media spotlight during his No campaign to the Nice Treaty referendum in the early 2000s.

The National Party revolves around 9 core principles which makes it unique among Irish political parties in that it is ideologically based rather than following the populist trend of the day. The main points of NP ideology are: support for a 32 county Ireland, against mass immigration and against abortion.

The NP tested the waters by running candidates in the 2020 general election but none of their candidates were elected with only a few hundred votes each. The party blamed the media's determination to ignore them for their poor performance with most voters claiming to have never heard of the NP. Newspapers had incorrectly listed NP candidates as Independents if they even listed them at all. It seemed like there was a concerted effort by the mainstream media to pretend the NP did not exist and hope that they would fade away.

That all changed last night with RTE's hatchet job on Justin Barrett and the Nationalist movement in Ireland. RTE have realised that the NP are not going away so have decided they must take Barrett down. The public discovered the NP after the last general election and now the cat is out of the bag. They will build upon their name recognition for a more successful election run next time around. How do the esteemed posters of Boards feel about the NP?

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

The what party?

Justin who?

BarnardsLoop

"Mass open borders" are just buzzwords used to scare people who don't know any better. Where are the examples of these "established parties" embracing them?

gmisk

With that screeching poisoned dwarf at their helm...I doubt they will go anywhere fast...thankfully

Peter from Gort

Justin' Barrett's wife number 2 is at least 20 years younger than him, how did he pull that one off ?

skooterblue2

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The national party would do better if they dropped barret and the ‘no to abortion’ shtick.

Once a society starts infanticide, it is in decline. The replacement rate among native Irish is below 1.81 approximately. Germany France and Italy are well below that. They will be finished in a few short generation.

gmisk

Peter from Gort wrote: »

Justin' Barrett's wife number 2 is at least 20 years younger than him, how did he pull that one off ?

Ah yeah wife number 2...when he had campaigned against divorce...

gmisk

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Once a society starts infanticide, it is in decline. The replacement rate among native Irish is below 1.81 approximately. Germany France and Italy are well below that. They will be finished in a few short generation.

Infanticide....and the white nationalist right wing replacement theory.....all in one post ...classy.

skooterblue2

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

They are violent nazis. They have threatened minorities here. They used to have connections with the IRA. yeah ..you sure?

That is Antifa, who have a wonderful reputation of turning up and wrecking the shop. See last week in France? SinnFein shop sell antifa goods.

skooterblue2

gmisk wrote: »

Infanticide....and the white nationalist right wing replacement theory.....all in one post ...classy.

Yup, its happening. Its happened before and it will happen again..... and look what they are bringing on to replace us.

Pherekydes

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Yup, its happening. Its happened before and it will happen again..... and look what they are bringing on to replace us.

I have news for you. We live, we die, and we are replaced by those who come after.

If you breed you will be replaced by your own kids.

I'm guessing that many people whining about the great white replacement are childless (like Gemma) or have fewer than 2 kids.

skooterblue2

Pherekydes wrote: »

I have news for you. We live, we die, and we are replaced by those who come after.

If you breed you will be replaced by your own kids.

I'm guessing that many people whining about the great white replacement are childless (like Gemma) or have fewer than 2 kids.

Yes because we cannot afford to have them because we are taxed to the hilt to pay for all this diversity, direct provisions, charities and over seas aid that are money pits. Oh Gemmas husband died of cancer a few years back so classy dig there. We are bumped down the housing list and a working couple cannot get a mortgage. The Engineering and Technical grades are running out of the country. I have 4 of my 5 cousins were doctors and they are gone. 30% of your money is taken as tax at the start and then its picked away at. If you are just breaking even or have a negative balance on your bank account at the end of the money you are a slave.

ancapailldorcha

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Yup, its happening. Its happened before and it will happen again..... and look what they are bringing on to replace us.

Any evidence that we're being replaced?

BarnardsLoop

Of course, it's not like the government has to pay for roads, schools, hospitals, policing, the civil service, public transport, etc..

skooterblue2

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Any evidence that we're being replaced?

only have to look around you and see the changes in the inner cities and Balbriggan. Can I say that here without being censored? Can't talk about children that were sexually assaulted in Courtown last year? I am guessing you live far away from these places?

ancapailldorcha

skooterblue2 wrote: »

only have to look around you and see the changes in the inner cities and Balbriggan. Can I say that here without being censored? Can't talk about children that were sexually assaulted in Courtown last year? I am guessing you live far away from these places?

None then. Ok.

skooterblue2

BarnardsLoop wrote: »

Of course, it's not like the government has to pay for roads, schools, hospitals, policing, the civil service, public transport, etc..

Yes it has to be paid for but the Corporation pay very little in tax and it is all placed on the individual. All my cousins are gone to Singapore and Australia except one. They say the quality of family life is terrible here. Singapore and Dubai do the same thing but very little tax on the individual. Here the middle and upper working class is dying.

skooterblue2

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

None then. Ok.

Didnt the media (and Boards included) shut those conversations down? The Police couldnt issue a description of the attackers in Courtown. We cant talk about the acid attacks in Waterford earlier this year, ye shut it down.

Odhinn

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Yup, its happening.

You've evidence of this?

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Its happened before and it will happen again.

When? Where?

skooterblue2 wrote: »

.... and look what they are bringing on to replace us.

Who? What?

ancapailldorcha

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Didnt the media (and Boards included) shut those conversations down? The Police couldnt issue a description of the attackers in Courtown. We cant talk about the acid attacks in Waterford earlier this year, ye shut it down.

Why are you asking me? If this happened, you should be able to demonstrate this yourself.

BarnardsLoop

skooterblue2 wrote: »

Didnt the media (and Boards included) shut those conversations down? The Police couldnt issue a description of the attackers in Courtown. We cant talk about the acid attacks in Waterford earlier this year, ye shut it down.

Boards closes all threads regarding ongoing court cases. And the Gardaí didn't release a description because:

[quote=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/gardaí-issue-further-appeal-over-alleged-sex-attack-in-courtown-1.3984249[/quote]
Investigators have been reluctant to share descriptions of the alleged attackers due to their age, sources said. A number, or perhaps all, of the suspects are underage.[/quote]

So there ya go.