|
Post by losleandros on Oct 21, 2011 8:24:34 GMT
Perhap's the best form of infiltration would be of the State broadcaster. From the 1970's a small but ideologically driven number of ideoluges ( extremist liberal/left/feminist ) infiltrated RTE & have had a totally disproportionate influence in determining social policy in Ireland. The ideologically weak leaders of the political parties ( particularly spineless individuals like Inda ) are putty in the hands of these ideologues. So forget about politics ( they only carry out orders ), if you want to influence the future path of Irish society, infiltrate RTE, you will have much more real influence.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 21, 2011 20:42:07 GMT
The problem with that is that to a considerable extent these people got in on the ground floor when the service was being created - it's much easier to shape a new institution than to alter it once it has taken shape.
|
|
|
Post by losleandros on Oct 22, 2011 16:01:10 GMT
With respect hibernicus, I don't think that's exactly true. From what I read the agenda driven infiltration became really pronounced in the late 1970's. I believe Gay Byrne was faciltating a degree of this " social engineering " in the 1960's, but the focus became much more pronounced in the late 1970's. I may have mentioned before that I read about a leading RTE personality of that time called Liam Nolan, who got out in the late 70's/early 80's because he was'nt happy with being forced to comply with agendas. All it takes is a couple of determined editors in News/Current Aaffairs to drive this type of thing.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 22, 2011 18:12:13 GMT
Infiltration by the WP is a phenomenon from the late 70s, yes - but I think it is fairly clear that a lot of the people involved in the new station saw themselves as trying to open the windows and start something new. It was inn the air given the contemporary arguments over the role of TV in Britain (with Mary Whitehouse as designated opponent/whipping-boy) and didn't necessarily need the sort of concentrated plotting the WP engaged in later.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Oct 26, 2011 22:07:40 GMT
I notice three men trying to stop tomorrow's referenda on a technicality, thrown out by the judge because they misunderstood the relevant provision of the constitution: www.rte.ie/news/2011/1026/referendums.html One of them is called Harry Rea. Is this the same Harry Rea who was a CSP candidate in Cork at the last election?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2011 23:22:05 GMT
Given the current socio-economic crisis, would a brand new mainstream, left of centre, "Christian Labour Party" be a more viable and realistic option than the CSP ? The name and political ethos would be much clearer to voters, and also serves highlight the unchristian nature of the current Labour party, and the cronie capitalism and privatisation antics of FF/FG.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2011 23:28:18 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2011 23:35:23 GMT
It has been a good month since their meeting. I am disappointed, I have not been contacted in any way by email or phone. I know that they hold a monthly meeting in Dublin for one of the ladies there told me so. It's not far from where I live, as they know from my details. Either I am just not their type or they don't invite interested parties along.
I was wavering as to whether or not to join the party but I think I shall let it be unless I hear from them. If they want to encourage new members beyond the lovely welcome they gave me at the meeting then an invite to some event is necessary. I am disappointed though, they are lovely people.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Nov 14, 2011 20:36:56 GMT
Spartacus, I can vaguely recall an attempt to launch a 'Christian Socialist Party' in Waterford and in Dublin South-West in the mid-1980s which seems to have died in the water. This proceeded the Christian Democrats and Christian Principles Party of 1991 by several years.
It wouldn't be too hard to present an economic agenda to the left of Labour. I have to say I am a bit skeptical of distributism - it doesn't have too much of a track record in the past century and a half - even though many Catholic friendly regimes were in existence for much of that period.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2011 23:17:42 GMT
Spartacus, I can vaguely recall an attempt to launch a 'Christian Socialist Party' in Waterford and in Dublin South-West in the mid-1980s which seems to have died in the water. This proceeded the Christian Democrats and Christian Principles Party of 1991 by several years. In general, the term "socialist" has too many negative conotations for Irish people, ultimately they fear it means restrictions/disadvantages for small and medium private enterprise, including farming etc. Also Pius XI famously wrote that "no one can be at the same time a good Catholic and a true socialist" In Catholicism, the Rerum Novarum encyclical of Leo XIII (1891) was the starting point of a teaching on social questions that was expanded and updated all through the 20th century. Despite the introduction of social thought as an object of religious thought, Rerum Novarum explicitly rejects what it calls "the main tenet of socialism": "Hence, it is clear that the main tenet of socialism, community of goods, must be utterly rejected, since it only injures those whom it would seem meant to benefit, is directly contrary to the natural rights of mankind, and would introduce confusion and disorder into the commonwealth. The first and most fundamental principle, therefore, if one would undertake to alleviate the condition of the masses, must be the inviolability of private property." Rerum Novarum, Leo XIII The encyclical promotes a kind of corporatism based on social solidarity among the classes with respects for the needs and rights of all. It wouldn't be too hard to present an economic agenda to the left of Labour. . This I would be very much in favour of, hence the suggested term "Christian Labour Party" to ensure absolute clarity for the voter, and again to highlight the decidedly unchristian nature of the Irish Labour Party/FF/FG/SF/United Left Alliance I have to say I am a bit skeptical of distributism - it doesn't have too much of a track record in the past century and a half - even though many Catholic friendly regimes were in existence for much of that period. So am I. Distributism is an interesting "third way" theory, practice is another matter. At the end of the day economic policies and goals must be practical, achievable, and realistic. A successful, and realistic economic policy is the absolute key to the success, or failure of a political party. As the democrats in the US say "It's the economy, stupid"
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Nov 19, 2011 19:02:52 GMT
I think the 1980s group was called the Christian Social party, not Christian Socialist. "Christian Labour" does not strike me as very clear either - would "labour" be defined narrowly (i.e. specifically working-class) or broadly (which could make it pretty meaningless and give a false impression)? Parties with Labour in their names are usually trade-union affiliated or breakaways from existing Labour parties.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 19, 2011 23:16:10 GMT
I think the 1980s group was called the Christian Social party, not Christian Socialist. "Christian " does not strike me as very clear either - would "" be defined narrowly (i.e. specifically working-class) or broadly (which could make it pretty meaningless and give a false impression)? Parties with in their names are usually trade-union affiliated or breakaways from existing parties. I don't agree that the term is all that unclear, it generally indicates a left of centre, social democratic policy, rather than a right wing style policy. The term "Solidarity" to me, does not indicate any economic direction, and the economy is the key issue for voters. Perhaps the name Christian Social Democrats (as Social and Democrat are key terms in my opinion) might be a more acceptable choice ? On a side note, I reccomend trying the following political compass site if you have not already tried it. www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Nov 20, 2011 14:41:03 GMT
I have no particular brief for the CSP, though I cast a protest vote for it when I can. The use of "solidarity" has good and bad implications - good in the sense that it is claiming to be concerned for the general interest and not for sectional interests (though this is extremely difficult to achieve in practice, which is why Polish Solidarity splintered very fast when it no longer had the communist dictatorship as a common enemy) - bad if it implies (as some of Richard Greene's statements have implied in the past) that we are in the same position as Polish Solidarity - that is, living under a dictatorship which suppresses the voice of the people, whose real views are assumed to be represented by the CSP. Of course it can be professionally damaging to be widely known to hold pro-life or traditionalist Catholic views, but that is not the same as living in an actual police state (similarly, while Des Fennell is describing a real phenomenon when he talks about the "Liberal Correctorate", it is quite disgraceful for him to insinuate as he does that it is indistinguishable from the dictatorships of the old Soviet Bloc). The fact is that the Church, the pro-life/pro-family movement, and attempts at Catholic politics in Ireland are in the mess they are in not only because of the opposition having seized the high ground so far as the means of influencing public opinion are concerned, but because of our own faults and failings. Our barbarians came from within, and we need spiritual and intellectual renewal a la St Benedict as a first step to rebuilding.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2011 18:40:01 GMT
The fact is that the Church, the pro-life/pro-family movement, and attempts at Catholic politics in Ireland are in the mess they are in not only because of the opposition having seized the high ground so far as the means of influencing public opinion are concerned, but because of our own faults and failings. Our barbarians came from within, and we need spiritual and intellectual renewal a la St Benedict as a first step to rebuilding. Well said.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 19, 2011 23:08:47 GMT
It seems from this (generally hostile) Politics.ie thread that the CSP protest over the Vatican embassy closure attracted about 70 people, which is more than I expected given the CSP's general weakness and the fact that it was a working day. (I was working myself.) www.politics.ie/forum/current-affairs/177290-protest-closure-vatican-embassy-leinster-house-ho-hum.htmlThe atheist bigots who dominate that particular thread think Henry VIII is a good role model, apparently. Their significant others had better take good care of their necks. I must say the self-professed Catholic whose post is reproduced below is even more alarming. He sounds a bit like the ACP: 9th December 2011 01:40 AM #29 Edo Politics.ie Regular Join Date May 2007 Location In the Garden Shed Posts 3,641 Originally Posted by P Ryan All the religious orders should be driven off their land & all assets confiscated by the state. Just like in England in the 1500s Given out current economic situation - maybe thats not a bad idea - thats what the French did in 1789 - they used it to clear the national debt - given our situation at the moment - maybe its the desperate measure that is needed. Im a Roman Catholic - you have my vote to do that - not that we plebs have any rights in church - but its not like they badly need all the land or the churches at the moment - plenty of mass-rocks still around. I dont think Jesus was much into accumulating land and materials goods and preaching in fancy buildings - I always got the impression that he was into the opposite - maybe a church stripped of property might become a church of the people again............... 9th December 2011 12:41 AM #21 P Ryan Politics.ie Newbie Join Date Nov 2011 Posts 36 All the religious orders should be driven off their land & all assets confiscated by the state. Just like in England in the 1500s lostexpectation and antiestablishmentarian like this.
|
|