‘OCCUPY Wall Street’ protestors on Dame Street

Nate--IRL-- · 11-10-2011 12:00am

Bannasidhe wrote: »

....or we can stand up for ourselves and demand change. And keep demanding it. Over and over and over until we succeed.
I

Please elaborate on what it is you want to change and more importantly what would you determine a success?

Nate

Permabear · 11-10-2011 12:06am

This post has been deleted.

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 12:15am

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

Please elaborate on what it is you want to change and more importantly what would you determine a success?

Nate

Change is when we have a political system in which our public representative must answer for their actions - not ride off into the sunset like Ahern, Cowen and Haughey before them etc etc before them free to enjoy enormous pensions.

Change is when government/Quango appointments are open and transparent - not favours to be gifted to political insiders.

Last Thursday, the gents from the NTMA came to tea with the Dail's Public Accounts Committee (PAC). Led by arch-insider John Corrigan, eight clean-shaven, grey-haired male plutocrats of a similar vintage took their seats and eyeballed us. John alone sported a beard.

The nine immortals sitting opposite us probably bagged total benefits of more than €3m in 2010's tough times. Despite the NTMA's culture of secrecy, we know -- thanks to a question from TD Michael McGrath -- that 14 of the top brass received more than €250,000 in that year of national sacrifice. The average salary of its 306 staff amounted to a staggering €98,000. And 84 per cent of them received added bonuses. The average bonus came to €7,681. Not a bad place to work.

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/shane-ross/shane-ross-ntma-immortals-win-again-2900669.html

Change is when the ridiculous level of centralisation is reversed and local government becomes responsible for, and accountable to, the communities they serve.

Change is when we see those caught with their hands in the cookie jar of public monies face legal action.

Change is when 166 TDs cannot claim close to 8 million euro between them in expenses as happened in 2009

In total, TDs claimed a whopping €7,825,467 in 2009 compared to €7,792,970 during the previous 12 months. When added to the expenses and allowances claimed by the 60 members of Seanad Eireann, the taxpayer picked up a tab of over €10m in expenses for members of both houses of the Oireachtas. The total spend on Oireachtas expenses in the past five years stands at over €50m, according to collated figures. [/UNQUOTE] http://www.independent.ie/national-news/tds-share-in-expenses-jackpot-as-claims-hit-83648m-2007224.html

Success is when we have - to use that hoary old phrase beloved of Americans - Government By the people, Of the people, For the people. It may not happen in my life time - but that doesn't mean I can't try and see that it happens within my granddaughters.

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 12:21am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I think the Labour Party (of which I used to be a member) need to learn that they too can be sent off into the political wilderness, as can FG.

We can create an alternative to SF you know. We have an opportunity to seize the day and force change - but only if we have the will. If we accept the status quo - then we will be stuck with the status quo. I would rather go down trying...

Yes - they fought for Irish self-determination. We had that in at least 26 counties until FF sold us down the river.

Yes - My grandmother led the protests against women having to retire at 60 while men could retire at 66.

I am not prepared to look my grandchildren in the eye and say - yes, you have this debt to pay off because of unbridled greed, lack of regulation and accountability and because our government never felt the need to consult the people as to our wishes and I did not protest.

Nate--IRL-- · 11-10-2011 12:26am

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Change is when we have a political system in which our public representative must answer for their actions - not ride off into the sunset like Ahern, Cowen and Haughey before them etc etc before them free to enjoy enormous pensions.

Change is when government/Quango appointments are open and transparent - not favours to be gifted to political insiders. http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/shane-ross/shane-ross-ntma-immortals-win-again-2900669.html

Change is when the ridiculous level of centralisation is reversed and local government becomes responsible for, and accountable to, the communities they serve.

Change is when we see those caught with their hands in the cookie jar of public monies face legal action.

Change is when 166 TDs cannot claim close to 8 million euro between them in expenses as happened in 2009 In total, TDs claimed a whopping €7,825,467 in 2009 compared to €7,792,970 during the previous 12 months. When added to the expenses and allowances claimed by the 60 members of Seanad Eireann, the taxpayer picked up a tab of over €10m in expenses for members of both houses of the Oireachtas. The total spend on Oireachtas expenses in the past five years stands at over €50m, according to collated figures. [/UNQUOTE] http://www.independent.ie/national-news/tds-share-in-expenses-jackpot-as-claims-hit-83648m-2007224.html

Success is when we have - to use that hoary old phrase beloved of Americans - Government By the people, Of the people, For the people. It may not happen in my life time - but that doesn't mean I can't try and see that it happens within my granddaughters.

I wholeheartedly agree with every single bit of that. No complaints there at all.

Unfortunately it won't help us in our current situation though, even if everything you propose is changed tonight. That is not a dismissal of your arguments, it's just that they are minuscule compared to the trough of shít we're in now.

Nate

Scofflaw · 11-10-2011 12:37am

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Then why don't you share it with the rest of us? Reading your posts all I get from your comments is resignation, "this is the situation, we're stuck with it, tough sh*t."

I cannot and will never, ever resign myself in that way. What has happened here is fundamentally wrong on so many levels and no one with a shred of conscience could possibly defend it.
While I'm not accusing you of defending it, I do get the impression that you're telling people to accept it and not resist.
Could I offer a rather controversial comparison here and suggest that if you'd been around in the early 1900s with this attitude, you would have told the Irish War of Independence supporters that they were wasting their time and that British rule was invincible, they may as well just stay at home.

History has, in my view, proven this sort of resigned pessimism wrong time and time again.

That assumes that all that's going on is resigned pessimism, though. To be fair, I've been so outright dismissive of the protesters' aims that I haven't really covered the alternative answers to them.

1. get the troika out of Ireland. We already know how to do this - fix the State's finances. Since fixing the State's finances is something we need to do anyway, I can't see the point of it. As far as I can see, the objection is essentially that we can't do things "our way". Now, if I genuinely felt that any Irish party or group was capable of a completely balanced and objective appraisal of what was needed to get the State's finances in order and the economy back on its feet, and had the vision, the guts, and the support to do it, I would happily call for the removal of the troika.

Unfortunately, though, our way is actually to take account of the voting power of vested interests, and in the main the objections to the troika appear to revolve around specific interests, be they sectoral, geographical, or socio-economic, feeling that their particular interests are not being adequately looked after. So the call is really to abandon a programme agreed with an external party with experience in these matters, and substitute a programme determined by the conflicting wishes of interest groups and based largely on who can shout loudest.

So that's a no from me - I'd rather get rid of the troika by working through the required austerity backed up and agreed with a neutral outside force.

2. "that the bank debt taken on by Ireland’s government be lifted". So after all the expenditure and effort involved in capitalising the banks, the money is simply withdrawn, and the banks collapse? Again, I prefer - at this point - to see the banks restored as far as possible to health, and sold off to recoup as much of the money as possible.

3. that offshore oil and gas reserves be “returned to the people”. Eh, I've been over this one repeatedly. First and foremost, they've never left the people, so I assume what's meant is nationalising what has been found. We have an attractive tax regime because we're hoping to attract oil companies to explore our offshore, something we can't afford to gamble on ourselves (particularly given the very disappointing results to date). The idea that nationalising the known reserves will yield something worth the inevitable difficulties that result from the action is based entirely on wishful thinking and imaginary numbers dreamed up by a journalist.

4. “real participatory democracy” be established in Ireland. Sure, who isn't in favour of that? I'll have some apple pie with mine. The slogan is meaningless - and if it means "direct democracy", I'll admit to cynicism. The referendums due at the end of the month look to pass without either debate or comprehension, and I can't help but note the protesters are doing nothing to highlight that, even though presumably it's exactly the kind of issue of concern.

So I wouldn't accept that my attitude is the result of 'resigned pessimism' - instead, it's because what the protesters are calling for is either meaningless or deluded. As I said earlier, marks for effort, no marks for intelligence.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 1:37am

Nate--IRL-- wrote: »

I wholeheartedly agree with every single bit of that. No complaints there at all.

Unfortunately it won't help us in our current situation though, even if everything you propose is changed tonight. That is not a dismissal of your arguments, it's just that they are minuscule compared to the trough of shít we're in now.

Nate

No it won't - but it may ensure we, as a people, are never placed in this situation again.

Who knew when a bunch of drag queens and diesel dykes rioted in NY city in 1969 that one day an openly Gay man would be running for the presidency of Ireland?

Who knew when 42 year old Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on a bus in 1955 that she would spark a movement that would one day see a Black Man elected President of the U.S?

Who knew when Suffragist Emily Davidson died under the hooves of King George V's horse at Epsom in 1913 that one day a woman would be elected PM of the UK 3 times, or that the U.S. would have women as the 66th and 67th Secretaries of State?

Who knew when the Chartists issued their demands for electoral reform in 1838 and were brutally repressed that by 1918 all but one of their demands (Parliament to be elected annually) would have been met?

Who knew when 207 unemployed shipworkers walked the 300 miles to London on the Jarrow Crusade in 1936 to protest that their families were starving that by 1946 a cradle to grave welfare system would be introduced in the UK?

Who knew in 1916 when a motley collection of Irish Volunteers and the Citizen's Army occupied sites in Dublin and declared the Irish Republic that less then 100 years later 3/4s of the island of Ireland would have gained it's sovereignty only to allow it to slip away due to government folly?

Every journey starts with a single step -

Permabear · 11-10-2011 1:46am

This post has been deleted.

Jippohead · 11-10-2011 1:53am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

So should the Irish people just shrug and live with their mistakes or try to rectify them?

Scofflaw · 11-10-2011 1:58am

Jippohead wrote: »

So should the Irish people just shrug and live with their mistakes or try to rectify them?

Rectify them, certainly - but simply rejecting the unpleasant consequences doesn't do anything towards rectifying the mistakes. If anything, it tends to perpetuate them, since you know you can reject the consequences afterwards.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 11-10-2011 2:04am

This post has been deleted.

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 2:05am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

As a professional historian - trust me - I am all too aware of the deficiencies of the Irish State. I also know that political systems will change only if they are forced to. I have had enough of civil war tribal politics, of cronyism and gombeen men. Of boom and bust economics. Of who you know being the key to success in Ireland. I want change -now I believe it is time I stood up and demanded it.

In other words, your grandmother led protests against the state she fought to establish — the same state that would also have prevented people of that generation from using birth control and reading the novels of F. Scott Fitzgerald. The same state that forced women civil servants to retire when they married. Again, when "Irish self-determination" gives rise to illiberal social conservatism, one has to wonder whether it can be unquestionably viewed as a good thing.

Yes, she was a self-educated woman left a widow at a young age with 5 children who was lucky to secure a job in RTE -the marriage Ban didn't effect her as she was a widow. It did effect her next door neighbour and my grandmother often railed about the injustice of it . She was an Old School republican who advocated a United Ireland. Even though a devout Catholic, she marched against the Abortion Referendum in the 1980s as she believed in the Right to Choose, she supported her daughter in securing a divorce from an abusive husband in England in the mid 1970s. Like many republican women, she felt believed in the 20s/30s that in the interests of securing the fragile new little state everyone needed to put the civil war behind them and pull together. She later expressed her grave disappointment at what she felt was the utter betrayal of Irish women by the republican movement.

There was unbridled greed and lack of regulation and accountability in 2002 and 2007, too. Each time the Irish electorate was consulted about their wishes, they re-elected Fianna Fáil governments.

Which is why we need to educate people that there is another way - that the if it's not FF it must be FG cycle can be broken. Who knew 10 years ago that the RRC would lose it's stranglehold on Irish society and that the majority of Irish people would ignore it's claim to be the purveyors of Moral truth in Ireland? Yet, that is exactly what has happened.

Permabear · 11-10-2011 2:12am

This post has been deleted.

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 2:38am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

One of my fondest memories is the day I was on the phone to my grandmother during the build-up to the divorce referendum and the local parish priest knocked on the door to 'discuss' divorce. She didn't hang up and the phone was in the Hall by the front door so I heard every word of the conversation (long distance - she cost me a bloody fortune!!). Believe me, by the time she had finished with him he was in no doubt that that particular household was voting with an emphatic YES. The Irish State was not what many of those who fought for wanted. We are slowly beginning to gain the civil liberties those people believed in, we also need to create a political system worthy of them.

Right now, we don't have much of an alternative. We have FG/FG, we have Labour as the political wing of the trade unions, and we have the nationalist/militant far left. With all the "We need a new party!" rhetoric of the past three years, no new party has emerged.

No - we don't have an alternative. But if we sit on our arses being good Paddy for Europe and accepting Paddy for the same meat/different gravy political parties, there will never be an alternative.

If we shrug our shoulders and say 'what can we do!?!' - there will never be an alternative.

Perhaps the best we can do is prevent this insane boom/bust merry-go-round continuing...that would be something.

But maybe, just maybe, if enough of us who live on this wonderful benighted little island stand together - suits and crusties, conservatives and leftys, men and women, old and young, religious and atheist, Irish and Non-Irish we can scare the bejazuz out of the powers that be and force them to realise - they work for us - and we are watching very carefully and taking notes....

20Cent · 11-10-2011 12:34pm

Scofflaw wrote: »

That assumes that all that's going on is resigned pessimism, though. To be fair, I've been so outright dismissive of the protesters' aims that I haven't really covered the alternative answers to them.

1. get the troika out of Ireland. We already know how to do this - fix the State's finances. Since fixing the State's finances is something we need to do anyway, I can't see the point of it. As far as I can see, the objection is essentially that we can't do things "our way". Now, if I genuinely felt that any Irish party or group was capable of a completely balanced and objective appraisal of what was needed to get the State's finances in order and the economy back on its feet, and had the vision, the guts, and the support to do it, I would happily call for the removal of the troika.

Unfortunately, though, our way is actually to take account of the voting power of vested interests, and in the main the objections to the troika appear to revolve around specific interests, be they sectoral, geographical, or socio-economic, feeling that their particular interests are not being adequately looked after. So the call is really to abandon a programme agreed with an external party with experience in these matters, and substitute a programme determined by the conflicting wishes of interest groups and based largely on who can shout loudest.

So that's a no from me - I'd rather get rid of the troika by working through the required austerity backed up and agreed with a neutral outside force.

2. "that the bank debt taken on by Ireland’s government be lifted". So after all the expenditure and effort involved in capitalising the banks, the money is simply withdrawn, and the banks collapse? Again, I prefer - at this point - to see the banks restored as far as possible to health, and sold off to recoup as much of the money as possible.

3. that offshore oil and gas reserves be “returned to the people”. Eh, I've been over this one repeatedly. First and foremost, they've never left the people, so I assume what's meant is nationalising what has been found. We have an attractive tax regime because we're hoping to attract oil companies to explore our offshore, something we can't afford to gamble on ourselves (particularly given the very disappointing results to date). The idea that nationalising the known reserves will yield something worth the inevitable difficulties that result from the action is based entirely on wishful thinking and imaginary numbers dreamed up by a journalist.

4. “real participatory democracy” be established in Ireland. Sure, who isn't in favour of that? I'll have some apple pie with mine. The slogan is meaningless - and if it means "direct democracy", I'll admit to cynicism. The referendums due at the end of the month look to pass without either debate or comprehension, and I can't help but note the protesters are doing nothing to highlight that, even though presumably it's exactly the kind of issue of concern.

So I wouldn't accept that my attitude is the result of 'resigned pessimism' - instead, it's because what the protesters are calling for is either meaningless or deluded. As I said earlier, marks for effort, no marks for intelligence.

cordially,
Scofflaw

To cut a long story short you are doing nothing then?

ei.sdraob · 11-10-2011 12:36pm

20Cent wrote: »

To cut a long story short you are doing nothing then?

While myself and Scofflaw often disagree on things, it seems he understands that this protest is misdirected

meglome · 11-10-2011 1:05pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

While myself and Scofflaw often disagree on things, it seems he understands that this protest is misdirected

While I can admire the determination that some people are showing, while I can admire their passion I can't admire or fail to notice they are trying the ignore the reality we are already in.

It's a real pity when there are so many things to actually protest about they chose to do this.

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 1:11pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

While myself and Scofflaw often disagree on things, it seems he understands that this protest is misdirected

and to shrug, accept the situation, dismiss those who do protest is to give tacit consent to government to continue their current tactics.

If you think our government is acting in the best interests of the majority of the people. Then grand. I don't.

If you think our government has demonstrated that it is serious about ending the political culture that led us to this place. That's grand. I don't.

If you think the members of our government are honestly sharing the financial pain with the citizenry. That's grand. I don't.

If you think our government has the political will to ensure those who acted unethically, Illegally or failed utterly to undertake the roles they were tasked with will be held accountable and face the consequences for their actions. That's grand. I don't.

If you think it is acceptable that FG/Labour were elected on a platform of specific promises but are unwilling/unable to follow through on those promises and simply echo the FF/Green mantra of 'Its the IMF/ECB what are stopping us. Honest.' That's Grand. I don't.

If you think it is acceptable that insiders continue to be appointed to quangos and consultancy positions with salaries of c1/4 million +. That's grand. I don't.

If you think the protest is misdirected - where do you think it should be directed?
If you think the protest is misdirected - how do we redirect it?

If you do not add your voice and your opinions - you are condemning yourself to silence.

If you agree with the status quo - that's grand. Stay silent.

If you believe things must change - get out and say so. Or nothing will change.

ei.sdraob · 11-10-2011 1:15pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

If you think the protest is misdirected - where do you think it should be directed?

Outside the Dail

If you are going to protest outside the Central bank (who are merely puppets to the ECB anyways) then at least protest about
* them not doing their job in past,
* and nothing being done about them not doing their job,
* and nothing being put in place to prevent them not doing their job again.

meglome · 11-10-2011 1:19pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

and to shrug, accept the situation, dismiss those who do protest is to give tacit consent to government to continue their current tactics.

If you think our government is acting in the best interests of the majority of the people. Then grand. I don't.

If you think our government has demonstrated that it is serious about ending the political culture that led us to this place. That's grand. I don't.

If you think the members of our government are honestly sharing the financial pain with the citizenry. That's grand. I don't.

If you think our government has the political will to ensure those who acted unethically, Illegally or failed utterly to undertake the roles they were tasked with will be held accountable and face the consequences for their actions. That's grand. I don't.

If you think it is acceptable that FG/Labour were elected on a platform of specific promises but are unwilling/unable to follow through on those promises and simply echo the FF/Green mantra of 'Its the IMF/ECB what are stopping us. Honest.' That's Grand. I don't.

If you think it is acceptable that insiders continue to be appointed to quangos and consultancy positions with salaries of c1/4 million +. That's grand. I don't.

If you do not add your voice and your opinions - you are condemning yourself to silence.

If you agree with the status quo - that's grand. Stay silent.

If you believe things must change - get out and say so. Or nothing will change.

Interestingly I agree with most of what you said there. However the stated aims of the protest, clearly set out in their 4 points (plan?!?!), are not what you just stated. So if you're asking me should we protest about most of the things in your post then yes we should. If you're asking me to support a protest that is chasing unrealistic and/or imaginary things then no sorry.... pointless.

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 1:24pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Outside the Dail

If you are going to protest outside the Central bank (who are merely puppets to the ECB anyways) then at least protest about them not doing their job in past, and nothing being done about them not doing their job, and nothing being put in place to prevent them not doing their job again.

There is an open mic at the protest In Dame Street. Your view is valid and you have the right (and by this point I would go so far as to say duty) to express it.
Go and stand by your convictions - have your say. Call for those responsible to be brought to account. Call for procedures to be put in place to properly regulate the financial sector. You will find many, many people will agree with you.

Its all well and good to state here that the protest is misguided - but if you (by 'you' I mean generic 'one' - not you personally

) are not prepared to add your voice and urge a direction....

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 1:34pm

meglome wrote: »

Interestingly I agree with most of what you said there. However the stated aims of the protest, clearly set out in their 4 points (plan?!?!), are not what you just stated. So if you're asking me should we protest about most of the things in your post then yes we should. If you're asking me to support a protest that is chasing unrealistic and/or imaginary things then no sorry.... pointless.

Those 'demands' are not written in stone. They are not a manifesto. They are the demands of people who have at least had the courage to make some demands. Yes, they are vague and aspirational (and a bit too new age/hippy for my tastes). That will not prevent me from adding my voice - with my 'demands'. In fact, I would go so far as to say now I must add my voice and strive to bring a more focused and practical list to the fore. I know I am not alone.

My motivation is not what is on a ' 4 point plan' - my motivation is the continuing existence of the same-oh crap as we always had. If I don't stand up and say that - what right have I complain when that same-oh is still with us in 20/30/40 years?

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 2:04pm

One man's report from Dame St.

It started at 2pm with barely thirty people, by five pm there were maybe a hundred and fifty, and still at midnight there were at least a hundred folks and ten tents. By 4am when we left there were half a dozen more tents and a marquee hosting a consensus decision making mini-assembly - did I mention this was at 4am ! This was certainly not the largest protest to grace the streets of Dublin, but without doubt I have never seen its like here before. There were veterans of many marches and folks for whom this was their first act of political defiance, and everything came together organically with no leaders, no parties, no egos and no power-tripping. There were no spokespeople and yet everyone was a spokesperson, there was no single message yet at times everyone managed to literally speak with one voice. There was anger but no violence, discontent but no apathy and despite the gravity of the injustices highlighted, the day itself was one of unrelenting positivity. It was quite simply a perfect example of how things could be.

Even the drumming circle failed to spoil my mood.

...For such a random mix of folks from differing backgrounds with different motivations, it was amazing to see how fast consensus was reached on a wide range of issues, and more inspiring to see how disagreements were overcome. One good quote to come from the assembly was that #OccupyDameStreet is a political movement, but not a party political movement, the sense being that any movement by the people is by default political (small 'p'), even if it exists outside the structures of the Political (large 'p') system.

... - the camp has adopted a policy of strict non-interference with the Bank and its employees; only time will tell if the Central Bank reciprocates.

...The primary thing to keep in your mind at all times about #OccupyDameStreet, and the #Occupy movement in general, is that it is a peaceful movement dedicated to non-violent resistance, to the point that the notion of leaving immediately if challenged by the gardai was discussed.

...One aspect of #OccupyDameStreet and the #Occupy movement in general that seemed to mystify the meeja was the fact that it is both leaderless and, on the face of it, has rather nebulous goals. The fact that it is a political movement outside the party political system means that it has a broad appeal, and the folks involved come from a wide range of backgrounds with an even wider range of reasons for talking part, all united by the desire to stand up and say 'Enough is enough" to their political and economic masters. But still journalist after journalist asked: "Who started this? Who is in charge? What are you hoping to accomplish?" While the first question is irrelevant, and the second is easy (nobody and everybody), the third is a little trickier to answer. I am there because I am tired of decisions being taken by those with political and economic authority on behalf of the richest 1% in this country (and the world). Politicians are elected by the people, and should represent the People, the 99%, and not the economic elite and certainly not corporations. The recent election changed nothing except who sits where in the Dáil, the policies being pursued are unchanged, the interaction with the IMF is unchanged, and the lack of accountability of those who destroyed our economy and bankrupted the State is unchanged. I do not think that by campaigning outside the Central Bank the walls of capitalism are going to come tumbling down, I do not think that the spirit of '68 will seize the country and we'll all go marching down Kildare Street arm in arm, and I do not think that a single banker will develop an urge to go home and rethink their life, but what I do hope is that as the elected representatives of the people sit and draw up the Budget, they will see the crowds and hear the outrage, and maybe, just maybe, will remember who they are accountable to and what they were elected into office for.

http://www.politico.ie/crisisjam/7954-support-the-99-protesters-occupy-dublins-dame-street.html

Permabear · 11-10-2011 3:59pm

This post has been deleted.

Riskymove · 11-10-2011 4:05pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

TBH I think its just a matter of intrepetation of 'freedom'

it wasn't necessarily 'freedom for the people to do whatever they want'

indeed it rarely is, there are many cases of overthowing rule only to bring in a strict new rule

Permabear · 11-10-2011 4:21pm

This post has been deleted.

Riskymove · 11-10-2011 4:24pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

that is not what I am saying

fighting for 'freedom' - in this case from rule by a different country - does not necessarily have anything to do with being liberal or conservative or anything else or even being in favour of any personal freedoms

they were not fighting for the introduction of liberalism

FreudianSlippers · 11-10-2011 4:27pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Just wanted to point out that this valid point was glossed over and nobody "protesting" decided to answer it; so I'll give it a little bump

20Cent · 11-10-2011 4:32pm

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Just wanted to point out that this valid point was glossed over and nobody "protesting" decided to answer it; so I'll give it a little bump

It makes some assumptions that aren't necessarily true:
That getting the troika out of Irish affairs would result in them terminating all support for the Irish economy. Or that the Irish economy needs or wants support from the Troika.

FreudianSlippers · 11-10-2011 4:36pm

20Cent wrote: »

It makes some assumptions that aren't necessarily true:
That getting the troika out of Irish affairs would result in them terminating all support for the Irish economy. Or that the Irish economy needs or wants support from the Troika.

That's not the question.

The question is clearly: What do you think would be the repercussions if the IMF, ECB, and EU suddenly terminated all support for the Irish economy?

Where does Ireland get the money necessary to "keep the lights on"?
What do we do with the money that the EU has already given us?

Permabear · 11-10-2011 4:47pm

This post has been deleted.

20Cent · 11-10-2011 4:51pm

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That's not the question.

The question is clearly: What do you think would be the repercussions if the IMF, ECB, and EU suddenly terminated all support for the Irish economy?

Where does Ireland get the money necessary to "keep the lights on"?
What do we do with the money that the EU has already given us?

Using some highly unlikely hypothetical situation to attack an actual achievable demand of the protesters makes you sound much crazier then them.
If the IMF, ECB, and EU suddenly terminated all support for the Irish economy then I'd imagine that the whole of the Eurozone was ending so we'd have to get printing our own currency.Also that they didn't want any of the money they have lent us back.

FreudianSlippers · 11-10-2011 4:57pm

20Cent wrote: »

Using some highly unlikely hypothetical situation to attack an actual achievable demand of the protesters makes you sound much crazier then them.
If the IMF, ECB, and EU suddenly terminated all support for the Irish economy then I'd imagine that the whole of the Eurozone was ending so we'd have to get printing our own currency.Also that they didn't want any of the money they have lent us back.

What on Earth are you talking about? I'm not the one sleeping in the streets saying EU/IMF out.

It's not my "highly unlikely hypothetical situation", it's yours.

20Cent · 11-10-2011 5:05pm

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

What on Earth are you talking about? I'm not the one sleeping in the streets saying EU/IMF out.

It's not my "highly unlikely hypothetical situation", it's yours.

I see where the confusion is. You take getting the troika out of Irish affairs as meaning all their loans etc whereas I took it to mean to stop their dictating to the gov about where to make cuts and how much to cut and forcing us to pay private debt.

FionnK86 · 11-10-2011 5:10pm

Im a student and Id rather just get the head down for the next year instead of protesting...I think the "occupy Dame Street" all around Newbridge was stupid...get your own protesters from the city.. half of us dont know where Dame Street is:P

FreudianSlippers · 11-10-2011 5:12pm

20Cent wrote: »

I see where the confusion is. You take getting the troika out of Irish affairs as meaning all their loans etc whereas I took it to mean to stop their dictating to the gov about where to make cuts and how much to cut and forcing us to pay private debt.

So you think they're just going to loan the money unconditionally then?
I don't see Troika forcing us to pay private debt either.

Permabear · 11-10-2011 5:12pm

This post has been deleted.

Dr Galen · 11-10-2011 5:13pm

20Cent wrote: »

I see where the confusion is. You take getting the troika out of Irish affairs as meaning all their loans etc whereas I took it to mean to stop their dictating to the gov about where to make cuts and how much to cut and forcing us to pay private debt.

The organgrinder usually controls the monkey in fairness

FionnK86 · 11-10-2011 5:15pm

ei.sdraob wrote: »

Its worse than that @Permabear

They are blaming the financial sector when the should be directing their anger at politicians,
it was politicians who decided on regulation issues,
it was politicians who moved the world financial system of gold standard,
it was politicians who got to influence central bank to flood the world with cheap money,
it was politicians who decided to bailout banks instead of letting the rotten apples fall

IT WAS US WHO VOTED FOR THEM!Since 1921 in Dail Eireann, if you didnt agree with their policies vote against them, if they were still in government then you obviously aren't in the majority.Its democracy.The worst form of government apart from all the others:)

Permabear · 11-10-2011 5:17pm

This post has been deleted.

Scofflaw · 11-10-2011 5:19pm

20Cent wrote: »

I see where the confusion is. You take getting the troika out of Irish affairs as meaning all their loans etc whereas I took it to mean to stop their dictating to the gov about where to make cuts and how much to cut and forcing us to pay private debt.

Give us your money and sod off, because we're so good at managing our economy there's no risk?

amused,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 11-10-2011 5:21pm

This post has been deleted.

FreudianSlippers · 11-10-2011 5:36pm

There's always money in the banana stand!

20Cent · 11-10-2011 5:42pm

Scofflaw wrote: »

Give us your money and sod off, because we're so good at managing our economy there's no risk?

amused,
Scofflaw

If the ECB/IMF told us to wear our underpants on the outside Scofflow would be on here telling us why we have to do it and we have no choice.

Sick of the smart ass negative bull**** from a lot of the posters on boards.ie the "libertarian" retard element have made it impossible to discuss anything.

I resign!!!!!!!1

Again.

FreudianSlippers · 11-10-2011 5:45pm

You know what they say about heat and kitchens!

meglome · 11-10-2011 5:52pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Those 'demands' are not written in stone. They are not a manifesto. They are the demands of people who have at least had the courage to make some demands. Yes, they are vague and aspirational (and a bit too new age/hippy for my tastes). That will not prevent me from adding my voice - with my 'demands'. In fact, I would go so far as to say now I must add my voice and strive to bring a more focused and practical list to the fore. I know I am not alone.

My motivation is not what is on a ' 4 point plan' - my motivation is the continuing existence of the same-oh crap as we always had. If I don't stand up and say that - what right have I complain when that same-oh is still with us in 20/30/40 years?

Hang on now they have very specifically laid out what their goals are. And as has been pointed out their goals are nonsense. It's like when the unions here went on marches over the last few years, I just couldn't join in as I disagreed with them wholeheartedly. Though at the same time I saw the need for protests on some issues, just different ones to the unions.

There are many things stated in this thread I'd happily join a protest about, you mentioned many of them. I see no point though in joining a protest who's stated aims I do not agree with and cannot work. You can't just decide the protest is about whatever you want it to be about, it either supports your stated goals or it doesn't. And right now it doesn't.

meglome · 11-10-2011 5:57pm

20Cent wrote: »

If the ECB/IMF told us to wear our underpants on the outside Scofflow would be on here telling us why we have to do it and we have no choice.

Sick of the smart ass negative bull**** from a lot of the posters on boards.ie the "libertarian" retard element have made it impossible to discuss anything.

I resign!!!!!!!1

Again.

I started this thread and one of the main reasons was I was so incredulous about what they were doing. I agree with the need to protest and there are lots of things to protest about. Yet somehow they managed to pick a set of things that are bull**** or imaginary. I mean come the **** on, of all the things going on and they couldn't find some actual real life legitimate targets. Sweet jesus.

Scofflaw · 11-10-2011 5:59pm

20Cent wrote: »

If the ECB/IMF told us to wear our underpants on the outside Scofflow would be on here telling us why we have to do it and we have no choice.

Sick of the smart ass negative bull**** from a lot of the posters on boards.ie the "libertarian" retard element have made it impossible to discuss anything.

I resign!!!!!!!1

Again.

As I said, if those who want to do something different had a credible plan rather than representing various interest groups who want a bigger share of the pie, or being muppets who would fail a primary school economics class, I'd happily support that alternative.

But that hasn't happened - and I appreciate that those who believe their plans are credible may find that a little insulting - and that's why all the protests we've been told will 'gather steam' and eventually blow the whole rotten mess to kingdom come instead peter away into irrelevant obscurity.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Bannasidhe · 11-10-2011 6:27pm

meglome wrote: »

Hang on now they have very specifically laid out what their goals are. And as has been pointed out their goals are nonsense. It's like when the unions here went on marches over the last few years, I just couldn't join in as I disagreed with them wholeheartedly. Though at the same time I saw the need for protests on some issues, just different ones to the unions.

There are many things stated in this thread I'd happily join a protest about, you mentioned many of them. I see no point though in joining a protest who's stated aims I do not agree with and cannot work. You can't just decide the protest is about whatever you want it to be about, it either supports your stated goals or it doesn't. And right now it doesn't.

Did you read the report from Dame Street I quoted passages from (#124)? You will see that the author echoes my views and that is why he was there. If you want to protest about some of the same things I said disturb me (or other things I didn't mention....!) - get down there and have your say. Get your ideas on the agenda!

But if you want to say ...'ah, sure the 4 things I read are pants like so I won't bother' even though it has been made very clear that everyone has the right to have an input.

If you decline to have that input into the aims of the protest - you can't really complain about the aims now can you?

I think the 4 points are wishy-washy, unfocused and really just snappy slogans. However, I do think there are serious issues that need to be highlighted and government made aware that a lot of people - people who are not 'activists' - ordinary people who are fed up of the continuing lack of change, the continuing lack of accountability, the continuing lack of taking responsibility for decisions being made now bar blaming either a)the previous government and/or b) IMF/ECB and want to send a clear and unambiguous message that we will not rest until things start to really change.

As the article made clear - I am not the only one.

I intend to have my input as I am tired of being silent. I am tired of broken election promises. I am tired of the hypocrisy of highly paid politicians and senior civil servants preaching about the need for austerity while taking no appreciable hit to their own financial positions. I am tired of the secrecy of NAMA and now NewEra. I am tired of reading about bankers bonuses continuing. I am tired of hearing we must all tighten our belts so SNAs will be cut, garda stations in rural areas will close, hospitals will shut wards and emergency services while our elected representatives continue to get a generous allowance just for turning up to work.

I have reached my breaking point and will no longer remain silent.

We must each decide what we can and cannot live with.

I can no longer live with myself if I remain a good little worker bee who pays her taxes, pays her bills, pays her mortgage and knuckles down to help pay for lax regulation, snouts in the trough and unbridled greed by a small elite. An elite who were protected by the previous government and are still being protected by the current one.

Permabear · 11-10-2011 7:19pm

This post has been deleted.

‘OCCUPY Wall Street’ protestors on Dame Street

Comments