A political system built on Acrimony.

Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
111
Likes
1
Points
18
#1
Understanding the nature and practice of politics in the 26 counties, the psychology involved, established patterns of behaviour, negativity, and recurring Irish political memes.

Friends, in following politics in this country, sometimes an overriding sense of fatalism can set in. Having lived in other countries, while it is quite understandable that there are common themes of attack politics and moves made to pursue power no matter where you go, in Ireland it sometimes seems as if the raison d'etre of Irish politics is just to attack others in pursuit of protecting established political norms. 

In the last century, it was quite literal in that the dominance of the civil war was directly referenced in describing FF and FG as the civil war parties. In terms of living memory and oral tradition, both parties defined themselves by their disdain of the other from their actions in the Civil war. Both had their godheads in the form of Dev and Collins, and both fresh in their memories of fighting the other entered in to the political establishment of the new state in terms of acrimony and not co-operation. The legacy of the civil war was an inherent part of party identity and self-image which in a more modern context would now be referred to brand identity. Now this is nothing we do not know already on an extremely general basis, but in bringing this up, it would help to look at the behaviour of both parties which dominated the state in the last century effectively setting the practices for the state of the current century. 

To give a sense of how fresh the acrimony from the Civil war was, here's a sample of a dail debate from the late 60's:

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I listened to the accusations here of Fianna Fáil skulduggery, all the wrongs they have done the country over the past 30 years, and so on.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]We have seen what has been thrown into it by the people who have done well by Fianna Fáil. We have seen the lorries decorated with bunting and with Fianna Fáil posters. We have seen bands on hire from distant counties. We have seen busloads of fugitives and gangsters and trick-of-the-loop men, all coming in to cheer and wave. [/font]

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/dail1968032000041?opendocument
Another example from the 40s:
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mr. Cosgrave:  I listened to one statement here this evening—or was it yesterday—which, if it had been uttered some 20 years ago would have been very much better. A certain gentleman said that he did not want any more of the civil war—no more civil war here. Mind you, if he had said that 20 years before it would have been much better for this country. I have not committed myself to that statement. The civil war was a severe lesson. It will not be forgotten.[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mr. O Ceallaigh: I hope the Deputy will not forget it either. He has enough to remember it by.[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mr. Cosgrave:  I can tell you, the little Minister did not suffer much in it.[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mr. O Ceallaigh: I did my share. Perhaps not as much as the Deputy. I did not deserve to suffer as much.[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mr. Cosgrave:  Outside of a feather bed, I suppose.[/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mr. O Ceallaigh: I did not shoot anybody to start a civil war, or murder anybody.

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/takes/dail1941031400004?opendocument&highlight=civil%20war%20murder[/font]
You'll note that from the above, debate today seems little different from the time's in which they took place. Especially depressing is the 1968 discussion in which emigration and economic ruin are familiar concepts. Effectively this demonstrates that Ireland has moved on very little in how it conducts it business of parliament, something that should be especially concerning in the 21st century where we are not isolated anymore and are in regular contact and observation of how other countries choose to conduct the business of government in line with rational best practices. 

Building on this this system of accusation, and counter accusation, it becomes only natural that victim's become the football of convenience for such a political system. This might be observed as a natural extension of the politics of acrimony. Which in itself brings the psychology of acrimony and conflict in to focus. How are we likely to behave as individuals in such a system where acrimony is part of normal behaviour? And as with so many other things in Irish governance, what type of culture arises? One of the major failures highlighted by the economic collapse of 2008 in Ireland was how culture within public life and governmental organisation led to a bystander effect where people failed to point out the danger because others in the group were actively ignoring it. In this regard, we can see that reason and civil behaviour become victims to acrimonious behaviour when groups engage in it, and that this as an ongoing political Irish meme is well established within our government. 

In conclusion, I'd like to highlight the trend towards hyperpartisanism in the United States, and offer the shocking realisation that the divisions now doing the US great harm have been a standard feature in Irish politics since the inception of the first dail post civil war. We have structured and built our methods of political practice, behaviour and debate so assiduously on this model of acrimony that even an event as severe as economic collapse cannot exorcise this demon from our island. It appears we can only hope to contain it, and in this regard I can only offer the suggestion that every time we feel inclined to attack each other, we must ask ourselves if we are feeding our own political demons in doing so.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,312
Likes
0
Points
36
#2
Not sure what the OP is driving at? "Great hatred/little room?" Maybe I am just over-analysing it.

Australian parliamentary exchanges are possibly the nastiest you will ever read, and I don't think it is all playing to the gallery either.  Their history of internecine party feuding makes their treatment of opponents seem quite civilised, BTW. But the Australina context is different and doesn't provide a good insight into the Irish one, except to note that the most vicious practitioners of the verbal diss tend to be of Irish descent.

US politics has been completley mediatised and in a country that large the message is often reduced to its simplest core content: negative propaganda. There is a lot of evidence this has the effect of switching people off politics, but hey, that might be useful to certain elements.

This "acrimony" is often, but not always, a symptom of factionalism rather than party politics. It occurs when there is very little that divides the so-called parties ideologically and often no reason to beleive that they would have markedly different values or ways of conducting themselves in govt, either because the external constraints are such that they have no great latitude for action or because what separates them is not a fully developed political philosophy.


Most Irish politics is of the latter kind: a game for courtiers. Courts are nasty places.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
71
Likes
0
Points
6
#3
An excellent topic. It's a miracle that this state actually functions sufficiently well to feed its citizens, we can thank the civil service-IDA for keeping the FDI machine that the state is currently so dependent on running so smoothly.

Indeed, we can even thank the corruption for ( just the Tigerish and immediate to that years of it ) greasing the wheels of development. There's a reason why people voted for Auctioneers and speculators as councillors and TDs. That reason was that those characters were interested in building and developing, activities which enhanced the piss poor economic and employment prospects in a country that was underdevelped until recent times.

The South is a version of the North, except in the South our differences are hidden by an impenetrable wall of disingenuousness. We're far too nice and inculcated into an ingrained conspiracy of silence on the real reasons that lay behind our various contempts for each other.

I'll get around to posting on that inpenetrable wall of disingenuousness in another post, because it'll be a long post in its own right.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
71
Likes
0
Points
6
#4
For a country that prides itself on being classless the primary tribal divider in the ROI is class. There is a tradition of not discussing the roots of the historically wealthy and those whose families historically have made good out of others misfortune in this country.

This goes back to The Famine and the Land Clearances which had started well before The Famine and continued after it. A family history that involved being part of the apparatus that cleared and or benefited from clearing the the cottiers off lands to make way for bigger farms and better lives for the ones who got to farm and manage the cleared land.

The new middle-class as it were are never mentioned in our agreed history of the past.  There's a tradition that old people in Ireland wouldn't talk about the past as for many of them it wasn't a pleasant one. After the War of Independence and Civil War there was no history of discussion of who exactly benefited from the change of management. 

We've had plenty of childish football team type banter between the sides but no serious discussion of the actual type of state both sides eventually agreed on. 

There was more to ROI than Civil War politics. FG set themselves up as the party of the Daecent people, FF set themselves up as the party of the little guy, of course the job of being the party of the little guy should have been the preserve of an Irish Labour party and their disinterest in being a mass party of the working class  ( particularly the rural working class ) tells another tale ( which I will get to ) of an unowned up to mindset that most definitely has scarred this country and seen Labour cede seniority to FF and FG so easily and completely.
 
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,312
Likes
0
Points
36
#5
Plebian said:
For a country that prides itself on being classless the primary tribal divider in the ROI is class. There is a tradition of not discussing the roots of the historically wealthy and those whose families historically have made good out of others misfortune in this country.

This goes back to The Famine and the Land Clearances which had started well before The Famine and continued after it. A family history that involved being part of the apparatus that cleared and or benefited from clearing the the cottiers off lands to make way for bigger farms and better lives for the ones who got to farm and manage the cleared land.

The new middle-class as it were are never mentioned in our agreed history of the past.  There's a tradition that old people in Ireland wouldn't talk about the past as for many of them it wasn't a pleasant one. After the War of Independence and Civil War there was no history of discussion of who exactly benefited from the change of management. 

We've had plenty of childish football team type banter between the sides but no serious discussion of the actual type of state both sides eventually agreed on. 

There was more to ROI than Civil War politics. FG set themselves up as the party of the Daecent people, FF set themselves up as the party of the little guy, of course the job of being the party of the little guy should have been the preserve of an Irish Labour party and their disinterest in being a mass party of the working class  ( particularly the rural working class ) tells another tale ( which I will get to ) of an unowned up to mindset that most definitely has scarred this country and seen Labour cede seniority to FF and FG so easily and completely.

Those are the roots, but it doesn't matter. The foundations of British mainstream parties could be accounted for in similar ways and their relevance has gradually disipated over the years through internal evolution and external pressures.

The crux of the issue is that you have a post-colonial state witha very small population which has regularly exported any elements that didn't fit.

The North was the great catalyst because it stayed exactly where it was. Something to think about.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
71
Likes
0
Points
6
#6
Not to be picking on Labour for the sake of it, but it's important to discuss how it fits into the political system we had and have in this country.

Labour claims the legacy of Connolly and has been since the birth of this state very far removed from his militant idealism. This is after all the party of Dimples O'Deary who joined FG, of Conor Cruise O'Brien ( what interest did he actually display in the nitty gritty of working class politics? ), Dick Spring ( not a bad egg but he's a businessman and former member of the board of AIB, a posh chap ),  and Ruairi Quinn another posh chap who's much more of a reformist type business class friendly chap than a champion of the interests of the poor.

There's a very perceptive and prescient 2007 CLR blog post below about the relationship between the Irish working class and the Labour Party, Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein. It's well worth a read.

Labour have always to my mind set themselves aside from the rest of Irish political parties bar their natural instinct to bond with FG. That instinct has damaged Labour's relationship with the working classes time and time again to the low point that they have currently reached. I used to put Labour's aloof attitude down to their feeling the ungrateful public didn't deserve Labour's love because the electorate had never really embraced Labour. That mindset explains the bitterness of Pat Rabbite, but he's not really a traditional Labour politician at all.  


[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]It’s always good to see one’s thoughts – and prejudices – supported by some external authority. In this instance I’m talking about Fintan O’Toole who in the Irish Times two weekends ago echoed (entirely unknowingly I’m sure) some of the points I made the previous week about the Labour Party. In particular he noted that both Fianna Fáil, and to a lesser extent Sinn Féin, were able to call upon the support of a significant tranche of the working class. As he notes:[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]What really marks it out from other mainstream social democratic parties in Europe is that it doesn’t get the support of the old working class. Fianna Fáil and, to a lesser extent, Sinn Féin, occupy too much of Labour’s natural territory. One of the things the party has to do if it is ever to become even the largest party in a coalition government is, oddly enough, to connect with the working class.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]This isn’t just a detail. Labour projects itself as the major party of the left in the 26 counties. So if the left is able to get, what, 11 to 12% of the popular vote, and a minority of the working class vote then we have to question the nature of that left.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]I’ve mentioned how I always found the vociferously negative attitude of some I knew in the LP, people I would have considerable respect for on almost every axis bar this, to Sinn Féin (but this also carried through to Fianna Fáil) extremely off-putting. And I’ve found it not just off-putting but actually counter productive. Because if one has a contemptuous attitude towards political rivals who are actually (and obviously in the case of SF I’m talking about particular instances, not the generality) more successful than one is in political endeavour then isn’t it plausible to suggest that such an approach might not connect with those very people the electoral rivals are doing so well with. If one maintains an effective pretense – and it is a pretense, because as I know from direct conversations the LP was willing to go into coalition with FF and as we know from the Senate was also willing to work directly with SF – that somehow either FF or SF are somehow more than simple electoral rivals and in some strange fashion embody all the ills of this society then this attitude will be seen as not just a reflection on those parties, but those who vote for them.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]I talk to a lot of LP people (indeed I’d count them amongst my friends :) ) and I genuinely think that the discourse some of them use is in political terms bizarre. It may well be that other parties are composed of crooks, or that others are only a step away from terrorism. But in both instances there are parties which the LP has worked with – or subsumed – who could have had similar charges made against.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]How does this play in the world beyond pure politics? How does a Labour Party which appears to be unable to deal with Fianna Fáil in even the most basic pragmatic terms – re: government building, and at that building government with one of the most popular administrations of recent history – go to the working class and explain this disdain? How can it propose that it is serious about power, serious about the working class, or even serious about the concerns of a working class which maintains an unfortunate loyalty to the other party?[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]How then does it engage with another section of the working class (and in truth these may overlap) which supports Sinn Féin? A section which is clearly voting for a left message as well as (or perhaps sometimes in spite of) a Republican message. And I’ve noted previously how a fair chunk of the old DL/WP vote seems to have crossed over to SF – although in fairness another chunk of that vote went with the DL TDs after the merger with the LP – a vote that thankfully was sufficiently concentrated to boost them from their more usual 16 to the 20-22 mark. Handy, no doubt, but hardly a revolutionary step forward.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]If the message coming from Labour on the personal level, and on the political level, is one that abhors the choices made by the Irish working class time and again, and refuses even to work with those choices, isn’t it possible that Labour is rendering itself slowly redundant as a party of the left (and this is a dynamic I think we often see with the much smaller left parties – being told one doesn’t get it isn’t the most apposite of tactics for increasing support)?[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]Again, for me the most bizarre aspect of the Mullingar Accord was not the Accord itself, but the seeming inability of those within the LP to attempt to push post-election for the implementation of a strong social democratic voice in the government of this state. To me that seems not so much a principled position as an incredible failure to recognise responsibility. And while I accept there are arguments regarding various issues are those issues more important than the character this society would reflect – even tangentially – with a strong social democratic voice in government? Because if, as I believe, Labour has even a residual potential to shape this society for the better – and the optimum situation would be the LP working with other progressive forces – then the onus was on it to make an effort to see if it could actually implement aspects of that programme in government. It might have failed in the effort, but in failure it could then turn and say it had taken a principled left stand, rather than stayed true to what should have never been more than a tactical alliance with a right of centre party.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]The nature of that alliance, again with a party whose links with the working class and indeed the left appear rather tenuous at best, also calls into question whether there is any understanding of the shape and tenor of our society on the part of those who proposed it. The logic of coalescing in a failed alliance with a party arguably somewhat further to the right of FF escapes me. What great principle is at work here?[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]This isn’t an argument for falling for the blandishments of FF. Indeed the option of refusing power in such a context might also be instructive to a growing political constituency. But… the point is that at the very least it might convince some elements of those who vote for FF and SF that Labour was willing to engage…and would appear very different from the recent SF tactic of chucking policy ballast over the side of the boat as the election neared if only because there is a distinction between being serious about being politics and appearing simply to try to mould ones political beliefs to the general consensus.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]Again we return to a distortion of our political system, one which Labour has happily done it’s inimitable bit to perpetuate, whereby a clear left/right ideological course where parties with a greater political affinity on that axis are somehow transformed into antagonists of the darkest hue rather than parties further right again. There is an argument, and it’s a valid one, that during the 1970s and 1980s the ‘liberal agenda’ necessitated close ties with Fine Gael. I’m perhaps being a bit unfair here, but isn’t it possible that that tilt tended paradoxically to detach Labour from the working class, identifying it as an outrider for FG, even ironically as the society broadly accepted, even quietly welcomed, the social changes? And no one thanks political parties for what they’ve done, it’s what they intend to do that grabs the voter. Social change, the North, neither linked in in any clear way to either the FG/Lab vote or indeed the FF vote. The thing is, other than a proper secularisation of the society (the necessity being something that Wednesday has pointed to recently) and a number of obvious other issues the ‘liberal’ social agenda is close to completion. In that context is it entirely surprising that the most recent version of Fine Gael has, in real terms, been of a rather more centre right hue than the glory days of FitzGerald? So why then did Labour strap itself to the mast in order to avoid the Siren voices of FF, only to see the good ship Mullingar Accord crash to pieces on the rocks of a successful, but really not quite successful enough alliance?[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]In a way, at this remove, I’m beginning to have a certain admiration for the Green Party. They knew exactly what they wanted, which was government, and once focussed on that goal they did all they had to to ensure they were in power. Of course it helps if one has an issue such as climate change which can pretty well trump all others as the end goal of a political project – what is larger than the fate of the planet? The choice being beetween seeing everyone broiled alive in twenty years as temperatures and sea levels rise across the planet or build a road? Er… well if I’m a GP supporter or member most likely I’ll take the road, and that pesky airport and indeed the shiny new private hospital. Yet, for all the paradoxes implicit in those selections (a very political form of triage) there remains a certain iron rigour – indeed a logic, even if one adopts very different viewpoints on those other issues – in the approach of the GP. But wait, Labour also has an issue, the construction of a truly social democratic (or democratic socialist – and yeah, therein lies another story) Republic of Ireland (incidentally as I write that I’m conscious of the curious fact that of Labour, the GP and SF, only Labour has no clear links north of the Border – how very interesting). That’s no less a project in terms of the impact it would have on Irish people… yet you’d go a long way before you heard any hint of putting real substance to that rhetoric in recent times. That’s as important, perhaps more so, than the sins of commission and omission of Fianna Fáil, a party which even it’s most ardent proponents accept will assume to some extent the character of those it is allied with.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]This may appear to be a harsh analysis of Labour. Yet as a party it actually has considerable potential. Fintan O’Toole noted that:[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]it needs to avoid the temptation to follow the line most often articulated by media commentators who are queuing up to present Labour’s problem as a failure to connect with the values of the Celtic Tiger (and a big hi there to John Waters on Monday). For a start, it is simply not true that Labour’s biggest problem is that it is out of synch with a young, vibrant prosperous Ireland. The RTÉ/Lansdowne exit poll for last May’s general election tells quite a different story. Labour values are not meaningless to the young: Labour did better – at 14 per cent support – with 18- to 29-year-olds than with any other age group. The party has in fact been steadily increasing its appeal to first-time voters over the last decade: 10 per cent of them voted Labour in 1997, 13 per cent in 2002 and 16 per cent in 2007.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]Shadowboxing with Fianna Fáil is great craic. Pat Rabbitte made a fine career in the 1990s from it. Dick Spring a somewhat shorter one. And indeed Fine Gael can tell us that, particularly now that they have the luxury of 50 plus TDs and five years to contemplate just how great it is. Being of the ‘one more push’ school perhaps they have high hopes for 2012. I wouldn’t. But by contrast Labour has a real opportunity to rework itself, to establish what it’s aims are and then to engage. Eamon Gilmore has made something of a start by ruling out pre-election alliances. And if they and he are going to stick to that perhaps they should do more than shadowbox and sit down and consider just why is Fianna Fáil more representative of the working class than they are, and just how Sinn Féin reaches the parts they can’t seem to?[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]Incidentally, is it just me or is Mark Hennessy’s rhetoric in the IT last Tuesday not a bit inappropriate. Apparently we were treated to the prospect that:Labour TD Éamon Gilmore is expected to be crowned leader of the Labour Party on Thursday, following the decision of Dublin North East TD Tommy Broughan last night to rule himself finally out of contention.[/font]
[font='Lucida Grande', 'Lucida Sans Unicode', Verdana, sans-serif]Wow. That’s a long way from the old WP line….So that’s why I never sent the application form in…[/font]
 
 
https://cedarlounge.wordpress.com/?s=labour+fianna+fail+and+the+working+class&searchbutton=go%21


I'll get around to posting on the real hidden class inspired deceptions and contempts that really define how this country functions.
 
OP
OP
S
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
111
Likes
1
Points
18
#7
The Eagle of the Ninth said:
Not sure what the OP is driving at? "Great hatred/little room?" Maybe I am just over-analysing it.

Australian parliamentary exchanges are possibly the nastiest you will ever read, and I don't think it is all playing to the gallery either.  Their history of internecine party feuding makes their treatment of opponents seem quite civilised, BTW. But the Australina context is different and doesn't provide a good insight into the Irish one, except to note that the most vicious practitioners of the verbal diss tend to be of Irish descent.

US politics has been completley mediatised and in a country that large the message is often reduced to its simplest core content: negative propaganda.  There is a lot of evidence this has the effect of switching people off politics, but hey, that might be useful to certain elements.

This "acrimony" is often, but not always, a symptom of factionalism rather than party politics. It occurs when there is very little that divides the so-called parties ideologically and often no reason to beleive that they would have markedly different values or ways of conducting themselves in govt, either because the external constraints are such that they have no great latitude for action or because what separates them is not a fully developed political philosophy.


Most Irish politics is of the latter kind: a game for courtiers.  Courts are nasty places.
The OP is kind of inspired by the exodius away from the other site to here. The reason this site is growing is that it is an oasis away from the outright trolling that happens in every thread. Rational discussion is eschewed in favor of the same sort of acrimonious bickering that has defined politics in this state since the Civil war, and even before with respect to Plebian's posts. Between Aus and the US you've highlighted factionalism, which in fairness is a root cause, but it's also worth considering other systems of governance where discussion takes precedence over attack politics. Not to credit the Brit's too much, but it would seem that even with their factionalism, there is more discussion than in the southern state, Eoin O'Broin went one further and mentioned that the level of discussion in Belfast politics seemed to be higher despite the Green/Orange divide.

So at this stage I'm asking, how ingrained in the psyche is the mode of behaviour, it seems to come as natural as breathing to the extreme that even new initiates in Irish politics get drawn down in to this culture and behaviour of acting like buffoons despite the best of intentions.



Plebian said:
For a country that prides itself on being classless the primary tribal divider in the ROI is class. There is a tradition of not discussing the roots of the historically wealthy and those whose families historically have made good out of others misfortune in this country.

This goes back to The Famine and the Land Clearances which had started well before The Famine and continued after it. A family history that involved being part of the apparatus that cleared and or benefited from clearing the the cottiers off lands to make way for bigger farms and better lives for the ones who got to farm and manage the cleared land.

The new middle-class as it were are never mentioned in our agreed history of the past.  There's a tradition that old people in Ireland wouldn't talk about the past as for many of them it wasn't a pleasant one. After the War of Independence and Civil War there was no history of discussion of who exactly benefited from the change of management. 

We've had plenty of childish football team type banter between the sides but no serious discussion of the actual type of state both sides eventually agreed on. 

There was more to ROI than Civil War politics. FG set themselves up as the party of the Daecent people, FF set themselves up as the party of the little guy, of course the job of being the party of the little guy should have been the preserve of an Irish Labour party and their disinterest in being a mass party of the working class  ( particularly the rural working class ) tells another tale ( which I will get to ) of an unowned up to mindset that most definitely has scarred this country and seen Labour cede seniority to FF and FG so easily and completely.
I can agree it goes back further, I guess I'm fascinated by the behavioural norms of the current contiguous southern Irish state. Good contributions btw.
 
Joined
Nov 9, 2015
Messages
71
Likes
0
Points
6
#8
On disingenuousness and contempts everything about the Irish political system hangs its hat.

No party is loyal to the state that has been built not even those that built it.

Our law is some kind of relic of British rule which is deliberately ineffective and providing of an excellent living to those on that merrygoround. Why has our Justice system not been modernised to operate efficiently and as a deterrent and safeguard of the citizens as a whole? Answer because it suits the insiders as it is and those Turkeys ain't voting for Christmas. The insiders have contempt for those not inside and disingenuously act as if changing the justice system isn't necessary.

The health service is another inefficient clusterfk. Much disingenuous wailing and gnashing of teeth and contempt for the end user who can just put up with the inefficiency because the God like system is a cash cow for too many vested interests to be tackled. What has changed in the sincerity stakes since Noel Brown's proposals were torpedoed by vested interests, nothing has.

The banking sector has kicked the citizens in the privates time after time generation after generation and it's still a secretive sacred cow, why? Eh because it quite obviously takes care of those who have taken care to make sure that they don't regulate it in the citizens interests.

You citizen are a cow to be milked, a crop to be farmed, a mushroom to be fed on the manure of obfuscation and inpenetrable process and plucked when ripe.


FF were the big winners in the Irish system, their disingenuousness lay in pretending that they were still the party of the little guy while contemptuously creaming off a big management fee in privilege, personal wealth and nod and wink justice applied to their set.  The Mr 10% fixers who eventually in fairness built a modern economy and a fair blast of social housing while prospering themselves. 

FG were nearly always the perpetual runners up, somewhat sore losers who developed an aloofness based on a belief that they were a better class than the corrupt populist Republicans and that when they got their turn at the tiller they were entitled to take care of their own set who deserved something for waiting patiently for their day. Their disingenuousness lies in their portrayal of themselves as being the virtuous and competent party, when their record when examined is very tatty indeed. Their contempt for everyone other than their own is on open display all the time.

Labour, think they've been left in a backwater that they're too good for and have zero loyalty to anything or anyone but themselves . Their disingenuousness is in pretending they're socialists their contempt for Irish sovereignty is almost total. In truth they aren't really important bar an honourable commitment to some modernising social legislation. 

SF are the outsiders, the newbies. They hold the Southern state in contempt with good reason, it battered them and they don't believe its anywhere near the finished article. Their disingenuousness lies in claiming to be socialists when they're not. Given time they will sucked into the political system here and be no different than the rest. 


Behind the obvious and public system lays an upper tier of unseen movers and shakers. Wealth and protection of privilege is their business. I once asked someone from South County Dublin about the anti-republican mindset and the answer was very enlightening. The suppression of republicanism and utter contempt for it was driven not by a West Brit love for mother England but by a fear that a Republican Govt would somehow seize their wealth and that answer explains an awful lot about the last 40 years of Irish media coverage of everything in this country.

The message is it's all grand, keep your head down or you'll get whacked and sure none of ye are starving so why change anything.



And the average citizen knows that they are playing handball against a haystack because there is SFA that they on their own can do against the political system that has been built.
 
Top Bottom