Green Party questioning Travellers intelligence?

Buford T. Justice XIX

riffmongous wrote: »

Ah come off it, of course you have to talk to people differently. Do you think farmers don't treat people differently when there is a farming discussion outside the farming forum? Do doctors talk the same way to patients that they would to other doctors?

You can still treat people as equals without treating them equally in every sense, and that's what she was actually saying, treat them normally, don't try to be all high and migthy and try to relate and talk to them instead

"If you start engaging with people and you're using - even the word 'sustainable' or 'biodiversity' - this is vocabulary that's new stuff and we shouldn't assume that people understand what they are.

Really now?

I really wonder if this lady has entered rural Ireland in the recent decade. New stuff? We're living in the middle of the country, not in a manicured estate with the odd tree and barely a native plant to be seen.

We see every day in the news how communities are reported as letting small areas return to nature and their delight as they sow imported flowering plants to encourage bees and wildlife and how they should be applauded and lauded for their foresight and green credentials. Yet in their own back gardens is a diversity wilderness and their front lawn paved over.

Yet I have miles of hedgerows, and more added since I took over, with acres of brambles, honeysuckle, alders, whitethorn, blackthorn and countless other species along with the fauna, native fauna at that, living on it. And that's without counting and mentioning the multiple species of native and non native birds of pasture and prey and I'm the one messing up the planet?

The truth is that their terms of reference are so far removed from reality that they aren't able to comprehend our reality. And that convention just shone a very bright light on that reality. They have no intention in engaging with 'others' on equal terms because they don't see us as equals. We're just ignoramuses who cannot appreciate their faultlessness and brilliance. And that's just a simple fact that will be reflected in the next, hopefully soon, election.

Eric Cartman

Standard dublin centric academic elitism, goes hand in hand with socialist politics “we have degrees, we know whats best for you”

riffmongous

MrMusician18 wrote: »

To be honest I think you've hit the nail on the head there. There are some posters here who would find fault with anything the greens do.

Tailoring your language to your audience is something that politicians do. For example George Washingtons inauguration speech was to fellow senators and congressmen and the language is of college graduate level. Obama's and Trump's inauguration speech was at a third/fourth grade level.

It's plain as day, I don't think half of them even read the article or tried to understand what she was saying, before looking to get offended and piling on.

emaherx

riffmongous wrote: »

It's plain as day, I don't think half of them even read the article or tried to understand what she was saying, before looking to get offended and piling on.

I read ever word, and it was fairly insulting BS.

Please explain why rural dwellers would be less likely to understand these very common words?

tayto lover

Paying any attention to the Green Party is the biggest mistake anyone can make.
They usually cost the taxpayer a lot of money with their airy fairy ideas.

seligehgit

riffmongous wrote: »

It's plain as day, I don't think half of them even read the article or tried to understand what she was saying, before looking to get offended and piling on.

What a patronising post.:rolleyes:

Read it in full and there's no lack of clarity in what she meant.

RandomViewer

listermint wrote: »

Wait should we all be living in cold caves now ?

Ffs I've no time for the green party. But retrofitting your own home so that is comfortable to live in and has low running cost into old age is smart. Anyone who thinks it's not needs to get off mad conspiracy forums on Facebook.


Nonsense

Houses are mostly comfortable, oil and coal heat them up nicely, Greens want people to spend tens of thousands up front for a small reduction in weekly running costs, that doesn't make any financial sense if it's going to take 20 to 30 years to see any saving.

RandomViewer

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Standard dublin centric academic elitism, goes hand in hand with socialist politics “we have degrees, we know whats best for you”

2 out 3 adults have some sort of third level qualification, it means very little nowadays

riffmongous

emaherx wrote: »

I read ever word, and it was fairly insulting BS.

Please explain why rural dwellers would be less likely to understand these very common words?

Because many people just plain aren't interested in it. It's not that they can't understand it, I'm sure most can, but do they want to, not necessarily. No different to urban voters, only that's not what they were talking about, it was a debate on how to win votes in rural areas.

Look if a Green Party activist called to the door, who do you think the average rural person would be more open to talking to:

a) the stranger banging on about biodiversity, sustainability, Kyoto or the Protocol, Paris agreement and the ECCP

or b) the person they recognise from the local matches and tidy towns who is interested in talking about why there was less/more swallows around this year and how bad the weather was this summer

meeeeh

riffmongous wrote: »

It's plain as day, I don't think half of them even read the article or tried to understand what she was saying, before looking to get offended and piling on.

Actually I read the article and if I was eligible to vote they would be one if the parties I would consider. However apparently I have to be told really slowly what they stand for for me to understand them. Give me a break this is not anti Green stuff it's anti patronising dismissive attitude.

riffmongous

seligehgit wrote: »

What a patronising post.:rolleyes:

Read it in full and there's no lack of clarity in what she meant.

Why did you thank a post saying 'imagine saying that in an interview' then, if you read everything

osarusan

The Greens have a real ability to damage themselves in the stupid ways they communicate reasonable ideas.

emaherx

riffmongous wrote: »

Because many people just plain aren't interested in it. It's not that they can't understand it, I'm sure most can, but do they want to, not necessarily. No different to urban voters, only that's not what they were talking about, it was a debate on how to win votes in rural areas.

Look if a Green Party activist called to the door, who do you think the average rural person would be more open to talking to:

a) the stranger banging on about biodiversity, sustainability, Kyoto or the Protocol, Paris agreement and the ECCP

or b) the person they recognise from the local matches and tidy towns who is interested in talking about why there was less/more swallows around this year and how bad the weather was this summer

She explicitly said rural people, if most people are of that attitude why single out rural dwellers and say they wouldn't understand these new big words? What if they had singled out a Dublin district in the same way? It was poor and people are right to be insulted.

They are a green party looking for a green vote and they are afraid to discuss biodiversity with rural people that's bizarre if nothing else.

riffmongous

emaherx wrote: »

She explicitly said rural people, if most people are of that attitude why single out rural dwellers and say they wouldn't understand these new big words? What if they had singled out a Dublin district in the same way? It was poor and people are right to be insulted.

They are a green party looking for a green vote and they are afraid to discuss biodiversity with rural people that's bizarre if nothing else.

Because it was debate on rural people, explicitly

StackSteevens

meeeeh wrote: »

I live in rural area. My neighbours are relatively big farmers, business owners, doctors, teachers, engineers, pharmacists, accountants and similar. I don't think telling us that we don't understand big words will solve their problem.

As do I.

And, with the exception of some blow-ins (a West Cork norm, alas - Ian Bailey doesn't live too far away!), most of my neighbours left school at 16 and work on the land or in manual jobs. Farmers, foresters, builders, labourers, shop assistants, hospitality sector workers (until Covid), mechanics, trawlermen, shellfish processing, housewives (none of your trendy homemakers around here!) a bookmaker - plus we've got a real butcher who kills his own cattle and pigs!

Fortunately, we also have a local national school teacher who is able to read and write so helps us to fill in all those complicated forms we need to claim grants and welfare payments. I'm sure that, if we asked her nicely, she'd probably be willing to help us simple peasants decypher a Green Party election leaflet!

seligehgit

riffmongous wrote: »

Why did you thank a post saying 'imagine saying that in an interview' then, if you read everything

We'll just have to agree to disagree.:)

riffmongous

seligehgit wrote: »

We'll just have to agree to disagree.:)

Fair enough

AllForIt

Being of rural background myself I can say country dwellers do have an aversion to 'big words' and similarly the way words are pronounced including names and surnames. Back in the early 90's my mum would tut tut whenever she heard any politician or newsreader use the word 'infrastructure' which to be fair was used to excess back then as we got out act together as a country.

At first I didn't know what her problem was, I wondered did she not know what it meant and maybe I should explain it her that it literally meant fixing the potholes, better roads, something that they were always complaining about. But now that I look back at it it was more that to them it qualified as a 'big word'. It's this idea of using fancy language as if the reason behind it is to impress or signal you'r social superiority. In my locality back then middle-class people would be called 'big nobs' often, for having air's and graces, when they were just behaving like middle-class people do.

However I don't think rural people are like that as much anymore, even my parents. Things have changed a lot.

TomTomTim

emaherx wrote: »

She explicitly said rural people, if most people are of that attitude why single out rural dwellers and say they wouldn't understand these new big words? What if they had singled out a Dublin district in the same way? It was poor and people are right to be insulted.

They are a green party looking for a green vote and they are afraid to discuss biodiversity with rural people that's bizarre if nothing else.

If it was said about the African community riffmongous would be on this thread full of outrage, screaming about racism and discrimination.

riffmongous

Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: »

Really now?

I really wonder if this lady has entered rural Ireland in the recent decade. New stuff? We're living in the middle of the country, not in a manicured estate with the odd tree and barely a native plant to be seen.

We see every day in the news how communities are reported as letting small areas return to nature and their delight as they sow imported flowering plants to encourage bees and wildlife and how they should be applauded and lauded for their foresight and green credentials. Yet in their own back gardens is a diversity wilderness and their front lawn paved over.

Yet I have miles of hedgerows, and more added since I took over, with acres of brambles, honeysuckle, alders, whitethorn, blackthorn and countless other species along with the fauna, native fauna at that, living on it. And that's without counting and mentioning the multiple species of native and non native birds of pasture and prey and I'm the one messing up the planet?

The truth is that their terms of reference are so far removed from reality that they aren't able to comprehend our reality. And that convention just shone a very bright light on that reality. They have no intention in engaging with 'others' on equal terms because they don't see us as equals. We're just ignoramuses who cannot appreciate their faultlessness and brilliance. And that's just a simple fact that will be reflected in the next, hopefully soon, election.

She's from and lives in rural county Clare so I'd say she has some idea.

Fair play on your biodiversity work, but it looks like you've made up your mind on every green party member without knowing much about the people themselves

emaherx

riffmongous wrote: »

Because it was debate on rural people, explicitly

Regardless very strange choice of words.
Don't say biodiversity instead talk about cows, birds, flowers etc.

You say most people aren't interested in such things which is probably true, but people interested in cows, birds or flowers would be the people who would most likely be interested in biodiversity so dumbing down language for these people because they are rural dwellers is very strange. Insert any other group of people into her sentence and there would be 10 times as much outrage.

emaherx

riffmongous wrote: »

She's from and lives in rural county Clare so I'd say she has some idea.

Fair play on your biodiversity work, but it looks like you've made up your mind on every green party member without knowing much about the people themselves

All the more shame on her, how she thinks of her neighbors.

riffmongous

TomTomTim wrote: »

If it was said about the African community riffmongous would be on this thread full of outrage, screaming about racism and discrimination.

Sure you couldn't even read the article properly, complaining earlier about how they singled out rural people for this when it was a debate on the GP in rural areas. There is an irony there, considering what you claim her point was

riffmongous

emaherx wrote: »

All the more shame on her, how she thinks of her neighbors.

Like I've being saying ad nauseum, I don't think that's what she meant. I had a look at her twitter and she explains it herself there

https://twitter.com/RoisinGarvey?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

I knocked on every door in Clare over the last few years and I’ve seen how people’s eyes glaze over if you talk to them about a biodiversity crisis or a UN report but if you say to people ‘we’re losing our birds and our bees and insects’ they’ll say yeah that’s a real problem

It’s the same if you talk to people about an ESRI report or an economic index vs if you tell them about how you lived in fuel poverty as a single mother and so you know why they are fearful of Green policies & why they're worried they won't be able to put diesel in their car

It’s not about talking down to anyone, as that headline suggested, it’s about making sure you’re not talking AT people. That was my advice. It’s about listening and cutting to the chase of why these issues matter.

I expressed that badly yesterday and I’m sorry.

To me, it makes sense. I'll leave it there

Mad_maxx

Yamanoto wrote: »

Perhaps that was true back in the day, but the younger wing of the party (including those who vehemently opposed entry into coalition government) are cultural Marxists and SJW's, who's policies are a world away from insulating your attic, taxing carbon and brewing up some elderflower wine.

the saoirse mchugh wing

emaherx

riffmongous wrote: »

Like I've being saying ad nauseum, I don't think that's what she meant. I had a look at her twitter and she explains it herself there

https://twitter.com/RoisinGarvey?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor




To me, it makes sense. I'll leave it there

It makes no sense, if it was a Dublin conference you wouldn't say you need to speak simple words for Dublin people.

um7y1h83ge06nx

Any apology for rural people?

Most rural people understand the Green party manifestos well and that's exactly why they tend not to vote for that party.

The Greens should focus more on staying awake in the Dail than making sweeping statements regarding rural people.

Bishop of hope

Grant Grumpy Pecan wrote: »

Any apology for rural people?

Most rural people understand the Green party manifestos well and that's exactly why they tend not to vote for that party.

The Greens should focus more on staying awake in the Dail than making sweeping statements regarding rural people.

Green types tend to be arsey holey types, of people and look down their noses on plain ways of life.
How dare we live a life not to their standards type of people.

um7y1h83ge06nx

Country people aren't as thick as she makes out. Only about 15 minutes where I grew up a company was started 50 years ago in a field where the head office was a portakabin, tiny operation. They have an unwritten rule where their CEO is always from the county. It's now public traded with a market cap of just under €20bn with plants in most continents. As a comparison the current market cap of Ryanair is "just" under €13bn. Definitely a case of country lads done well.

The company is Kerry Group. Doubt many of their shareholders are Green party supporters. :-)

Fred Cryton

How sweet.

The Greens think the rural folk don't vote for them because they just don't understand those big words.

Perhaps their policies of taxing private transportation to the hilt and their war against the agri-food sector has something to do with it.

I suppose we all have to a have a bit of self delusion to get through life.