Irish Political Dynasties

cryptocurrency

As the local elections loom, I can't help notice many of the options putting themselves forward for the established parties are direct offspring or close relations of former politicians on the area. Do you find that influences your decision in any way, be it positively or negatively. I must be honest I am starting to be put off some parties when I see their latest candidate seems to be a new generation of the old. I know I should look at each candidate on their individual merits and not have my view influenced by these things, but it's there, in the back of my mind; Am I wrong, is this something I am alone in thinking about?

I find myself increasingly of the view we need to move from the default FG/FF parties, especially when the same names are resurfacing time and time again.

Peregrinus

The political dynasty has long been a feature of the Irish political scene — look at the Blaneys, the Bolands, the Cosgraves, the Lenihans, the FitzGeralds, and countless others.

"Moving on" from FF/FG doesn't mean you won't encounter dynasties; you have dynasties in minor parties (Catherine Martin, her husband and her brother are all Green politicians; you have the Spring dynasty and the Larkin dynasty in the Labour party); you get cross-party dynasties (various members of the Childers family have represented Sinn Féin, FF and Labour) and you get dynasties in the Independent sector (the Healy-Raes).

zell12

We obviously vote for them, we want them

Peregrinus

It's not a uniquely Irish thing. Winston Churchill's grandfather and father, Churchill himself, and Churchill's son and grandson, were all politicians, as were various other members of that family. In France, the third generation of the Le Pen family is currently active in national politics. Charles de Gaulle's son and grandson were politicians.  Richard von Weizsäcker, the President of Germany, was the son of a Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs and the grandson of a Prime Minister of Wurttemburg. And don't get me started on Italian political dynasties.

Guildenstern

It's a total turn off as is the continuous use by FFG of celebrity candidates.

Unfortunately there is a percentage of the population who seem to be always swayed by this so expect it to continue. It's not as common as it used to be though.

cryptocurrency

As the calibre of candidates is so inspiring I now use this as part of the process of elimination on who not to vote for. Names of families looking to consolidate some local monopoly on these positions, based on the legacy of a once prominent relative, will be an instant elimination from a vote for me. It doesn't make a difference to local events and in even the worst case scenario it will deliver the same result in quality in the position. I can't see how we lose by taking this position on it.

I see the names and it always reminds me of this ...

https://youtu.be/cjl8OIZijjY?feature=shared

cryptocurrency

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048099#Comment_122048099

I understand this but it's also hard to take someone seriously who put themselves Infront of you to say they are the best person to represent the area based on what their dad, uncle or grandad did..It should be an instant red flag on the kind of personality you are dealing with straight away. Let's be honest, they've convinced themselves they are the right person for the job based on this.

cryptocurrency

Yes but let's be honest, Churchill was by all accounts a horrible individual with some really horrible views, probably much worse then anything even the Le Pens have said. Imagine that.

Peregrinus

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048157#Comment_122048157

It's not as simple as that.

For the most part, people don't go into politics because of an exaggerated sense of their own importance or their own ability, still less because of an assumption that they have inherited importance and ability from their great-uncle. They go into politics because they're interested; they enjoy it; they want to make a difference; they like to be influential or to wield power.

It shouldn't be amazing that people who grow up surrounded by the practice of politics are more likely be drawn to politics.

Also, obviously, politics is a very personal business that thrives on networking, relationship-building, etc. And people who grow up with political connections are must better-positioned in that regard.

So, people who come from political families are more likely to be drawn to a career in politics. And, if they choose such a career, they have a definite early-career advantage. None of this means that they are, or they think they are, in any sense better than rival politicians with no such background or connections.

This is separate from the issue of why voters vote for them, rather than for other candidates. There's no doubt that name recognition is an electoral asset.

You point yourself to the phenomenon of the celebrity candidate — someone with no political background or connections but who has acheived fame is some other field of endeavour. This fame is an electoral asset though, when you think about it, there's no reason why it should be. I think the reason that it is is that a lot of voters are not that interested in politics. Knowing little and caring less about the candidates politica position, they struggle to find a basis for preferring one candidate over another. In this situation, the candidate whose name they recognise has a definite edge over the candidate whose name they do not recognise, even if the reason they recognise him has little to do with politics.

The candidate from the political dynasty benefits from name recognition factor, just like the candidate whose chief claim to fame is sporting prowess or a career in television. The more astute voter might dismiss this, but that's because he has other, more relevant criteria upon which to assess the candiates and make his choice.

To be honest, rejeting a candidate because he comes from a political dynasty is just as irrational as voting for him because he comes from a political dynasty. If coming from a political dynasty doesn't mean that he has the skills, aptitudes, values, etc that will make him a good public representative, equally it must also not mean that he doesn't.

crusd

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122048151#Comment_122048151

McSavage himself been a member of one of the most prominent political (and entertainment now also) dynasties in the states history. Its easy lampoon the "culchies" when in reality the Andrews, Coveneys, Lenihans etc were dynasties of the elites and as often as not elected in the wealthiest constituencies

Clo-Clo

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058348244/irish-political-dynasties

If the councillor is doing the best job in the area why wouldn't you vote for the FF/FG?

People seem to be determined to do the "in thing" and not vote for FF/FG and can be best described "Cutting off one's nose to spite one's face"

Especially when you look at councillors you need someone who is active in the area, working in the community etc. Voting in someone just because they are not FF/FG but are useless is going to help you how?

Vote for who you think is the best person for the job, this can be based on previous results and if they don't have previous then look at what they are doing in the area. A very good councillor in our area, unfortunately passed away, was involved in all the sports clubs/fundraising in the area/part of community groups etc long before going for election. So people knew he would work for the area.

He had no connection to a "dynasties". But in the same conversation my parents have a great local councillor, going back a few generations they are councillors, but he gets things done. Does it matter which party either are part of?

In terms of the last general election, what a lot of people have found out is that just ticking a name in a box to not vote for a certain party instead of the best person, means you are left with that person for 5 years. So does it actually make sense?

cryptocurrency

https://m.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/fionnan-sheahan-cloning-mcgrath-coveneys-cover-and-a-fourth-generation-haughey-local-elections-offer-hint-of-political-successors/a437652517.html?utm_campaign=webpush&utm_medium=push&utm_source=indo

We may have comfortably avoided the fringe head the balls at the ballot box but it seems we've also managed to reaffirm the same people, same parties, and the further laid the platform for more of the same for generations more. Don't complain about anything again. We had plenty of middle of the road, centrist candidates and people still went back to the same parties and familiar family names who don't really do much.