|
Post by Askel McThurkill on Apr 14, 2010 14:04:41 GMT
Well, some elements in Labour might not like her, but many in the media still do.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 14, 2010 17:20:42 GMT
Noel Browne and Jim Kemmy were quite widely hated (to some extent unjustly) but that didn't stop them having an impact through their abilitY to attract a core group of followers and admirers. Also she is riding what one may call the narrative of modern Irish history increasingly prevalent among the young and the professional classes, that progress takes the shape of moving FROM Catholicism/backwardness/poverty/authoritarianism/sexual and cultural repression ranging from censorship and child abuse to anti-jazz rallies TO secularism/prosperity/education/freedom/sexual and intellectual liberation, with abortion seen as a vital part thereof and opposition to it equated with racism. This media narrative has as its implicit end that Ireland will not be fulfilled until we are either all atheists, or have eliminated the "institutional" church and replaced it by a non-specific undemanding cultural Catholicism with little positive content. Bacik sees herself as embodying this historical process and hopes to make herself the new Mary Robinson by riding it.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 22, 2010 9:48:27 GMT
BTW last Monday's IRISH TIMES report on the Labour Party conference included calls (from Ruairi Quinn inter alia) demanding that the ownership and patronage of Church schools should be transferred to the Government to offset the cost of compensating abuse victims, and for Irish education generally to be secularised. Given the current discredited position of the Church, the extent to which the Church is already being marginalised within the school system, and the increasingly militant secularism found in the teachers' unions, methinks if Labour is prominent in the next government the outlook is not good.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Apr 22, 2010 11:23:20 GMT
That makes things uncomfortable. If Catholic-minded voters can't vote for Labour, they should not vote for Fine Gael and cannot be guarranteed that voting Fianna Fáil is going to keep Labour out (in spite of what Gilmore has said - a FF-Labour coalition is not out of the question; if no other sets of numbers stack up, this will happen, maybe after both parties lose their leaders).
What way do we vote then?
Personally, I believe the government will run its full course to 2012 if for no better reason than that it is in the interest of neither FF nor the Greens to have an election any sooner. Many political and economic factors may have changed since then (though I think the Greens would face melt-down even in a good time). Personally I don't see FF taking anything other than a pasting, but there are signs of a slow economic recovery. Many FF canvassers who stayed at home last summer might be more inclined to go from door to door now.
With the Greens, it is a different matter. The fire behind the party was revolutionary in a similar manner to the old Workers' Party though the ideology was very different. For people like these, any compromise is too much compromise and most have already exited the party, even ahead of Patricia McKenna. Those members who came in on a Green bandwagon (as happens) don't have the same level of commitment. From that point of view, the Green election machine, as far as it ever existed will be now damaged beyond repair.
With regard to Fianna Fáil, they can afford to lose the next election, but they will not go into the fray on that basis. Fine Gael, on the other hand, must win. They have the wind behind them still, but not to the same degree as it was there this past summer. If there is a snap general election, they are home and dry, but this isn't likely to happen. They have to maintain their shape for most likely another two years. And it is very unlikely they will do this without Labour. So does that mean the Catholic vote should go to Fianna Fáil?
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 22, 2010 14:11:13 GMT
The trouble is that (in contrast with the 1980s) there are few or no TDs who identify themselves as expressly pro-Church (either from genuine conviction or opportunism) while there is a growing and aggressive secularist constituency both among TDs and among voters. The pro-church forces are weak, confused and demoralised; the anti-church people have a definite agenda and feel the wind of history is in their favour. A knife will always cut through butter. I would say (1) Fortunately PR allows us to cast a protest vote for pro-life Independents, though most are hopeless in every sense of the word and their weakness only encourages the other side (2) then vote for individual candidates within the major parties who are most sympathetic or at least less unsympathetic - though here again the purists don't help; there is a mindset in some circles that if you vote for Bad to keep out Worse you are guilty of Bad's misdeeds, so you vote for a no-hoper and don't transfer or else don't vote at all, even if it lets Worse in (3) Finally all other things being equal I would say FF is a better bet if you can stomach them, unless we are talking about someone like Mary O'Rourke, who has been ranting about the Church for quite some time. Personally, I fear we will end with Labour holding the balance, so you will get them whether you vote FF or FG.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Apr 22, 2010 14:24:41 GMT
IRISH INDEPENDENT points out that Gilmore's pledge to rewrite the constitution has implications for the abortion issue. Credit where credit is due - I got this link from thoughtactioneire, a blog which I usually avoid because of its rampant and ongoing anti-semitism. This acknowledgment does not mean that I have any more respect than I had before for that blog; by its obsessive Jew-hatred it has placed itself outside the realm of human decency. Your prayers are invited for the speedy repentance of the persons responsible for this evil, so that they may repent and make reparation for their slanders and other sins. www.independent.ie/national-news/promise-to-rewrite-constitution-will-reignite-debate-on-abortion-2143031.html
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 12, 2010 15:38:23 GMT
Your prayers are requested for the repose of the soul of Sean Dublin Bay Loftus, former Independent/Community TD and member of Dublin Corporation, who has died. Unlike most later Dublin local independents of his type, who tend to identify as left and pretty far-left too, he was Christian Democrat in orientation. I think he started out in Joseph Hanly's National Action, which was a dotty Salazarist group, but he quickly adjusted to reality. In the early 1960s he was involved in the establishment of a short-lived Christian Democrat Party and after it was refused registration he changed his name by deed poll for a time to incorporate the words "Christian Democrat". Unlike most of our later "Christian" candidates and micro-parties, he knew that the way to building an electoral base is to get involved in issues of local concern - what might be seen as apostolic work - rather than popping up every election time, calling yourself a "Christian" candidate, and wondering why you lose your deposit instead of securing a landslide victory. He was pretty close to retirement at the time of the infamous X case, but I remember him speaking out on the subject. Now the labourer's task is done. Pray for him.
|
|
|
Post by loughcrew on Jul 14, 2010 12:17:42 GMT
Poor old Sean Dublin Bay Loftus wasn't long dead before John Gormley, leader of the greatly despised Green Party, claimed him as one of their own kind in a mawkish tribute.http://www.afloat.ie/afloat-news-update/item/13428-politicians-extend-condolences-on-death-of-sean-dublin-bay-loftus/
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 14, 2010 12:52:55 GMT
To be fair, he was an environmentalist and to that extent the greens are entitled to claim some descent from him - but he was something else as well which they were not.
Not all his supporters were Christian Democrats as he was - I believe one of his leading activists in Dublin NE became WP after Loftus moved his candidacy to Dublin NC. The point is that if "Christian" parties and candidates wish to achieve anything they have to move beyond being single-issue/ vote for us to clear your conscience protest candidates. They have to work at ground level and address issues of concern for local people, then relate them to a wider agenda informed by belief. That is what Dublin Bay Loftus did to some extent - that is what the CSP and other transient groups by and large have not done.
|
|
|
Post by loughcrew on Jul 14, 2010 16:06:56 GMT
Even the Greens were enviromentalists once but look at them now, just a bunch of power and money crazed destroyers of our Catholic culture.
|
|
|
Post by Harris on Jul 15, 2010 11:32:10 GMT
I have a feeling The Green Party will be decimated at the next election.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 15, 2010 13:00:04 GMT
Indeed they will. Patricia McKenna is setting up a Green splinter party, Fis Nua - I wonder how that will do.
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Jul 21, 2010 9:31:46 GMT
I think I will join the (unusual) consensus between Loughcrew, Harris and Hibernicus - I think the Greens are facing wipe out.
The advent of Fis Nua seems to me a role reversal of the relationship between the Workers' Party and Democratic Left - in that case, the revolutionaries stayed with the old party while the opportunists created a new party. The opportunists are staying in the Greens, while the committed environmentalists may or may not go into Fis Nua. However, not unlike the Workers' Party, Fis Nua will be a fringe party.
The Christian Solidarity Party should, as Patrick Henry said of George III in pre-independence America, profit by their example. The balance between idealistic committment and political pragmatism, is very difficult, but if played well, it is possible to be a very effective smaller party.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jul 22, 2010 12:35:16 GMT
It seems almost impossible to find out anything about the CSP these days. Do they have any sort of leadership structure/ policy documents,or are they just a small group of like-minded individuals?
|
|
|
Post by Alaisdir Ua Séaghdha on Jul 26, 2010 11:18:23 GMT
I thought the recent motion of no confidence in Enda defeat put an end to bickering within Fine Gael. This seems not to be the case. This is very dangerous in a party who have a tremendous opportunity in their grasp.
Especially as FF can afford to lose the next election, but FG cannot.
|
|