Ireland and the hereditary principle

mountainyman

I wonder did any of you out there in the ether see the cover of the Phoenix magazine recently? It was a photo of Brian Lenihan, Brian Cowen and Mary Coughlan. All of them inherited their seats.
While Mary Coughlan's father was a man of straw her uncle is still regarded as an honest and honourable man.
We will leave the integrity of the other TD's parents to one side.

Do Fianna Failers beleive that there are some people who are the best people and better fitted to rule than the rest of us.

Why do they keep voting for the children of TDs?

McArmalite

mountainyman wrote: »

I wonder did any of you out there in the ether see the cover of the Phoenix magazine recently? It was a photo of Brian Lenihan, Brian Cowen and Mary Coughlan. All of them inherited their seats.
While Mary Coughlan's father was a man of straw her uncle is still regarded as an honest and honourable man.
We will leave the integrity of the other TD's parents to one side.

Do Fianna Failers beleive that there are some people who are the best people and better fitted to rule than the rest of us.

Why do they keep voting for the children of TDs?

I agree with you, it seems to be a hereditary thing. Though FF aren't the only ones. Don't the Cosgraves of FG have something similiar, and didn't Dessie O'Malley inhereit his seat from Daddy, and Dick Spring also from his Daddy ?

mountainyman

McArmalite wrote: »

I agree with you, it seems to be a hereditary thing. Though FF aren't the only ones. Don't the Cosgraves of FG have something similiar, and didn't Dessie O'Malley inhereit his seat from Daddy, and Dick Spring also from his Daddy ?

Dick Spring was Dan Spring's son so yes. Th principle reaches its nadir in Labour.
[1] It is hypocritical
[2] It is pretty common Mary Upton was someone's sister and there was a TD who lied about his age until the son was old enough to take over.

By the way not wishing ill on anyone but if the hereditary principle was to be carriied on check out Kathleen Lynch's daughters. Kathleen was always a fine looking woman but the kids are stunning.


Liam Cosgrave inherited his seat from the father . But tha dynasty is over because the 3rd generation was caught taking a bribe.

The Corinthian

I've always found the Dail Peerage to be a bit odd, especially given the Irish aversion to all things aristocratic, to the point that we have no honours system (the only country in Europe AFAIK). Irish politics is full of direct heirs and family members.

Another two on the horizon looking to enter the family business are Garrett Tuberty (brother of Ryan and a member of the Andrews political clan) and Shay Brennan (named after his father). Neither is inheriting a seat, but it's interesting to note that politics in Ireland appears to lend itself towards a nepotistic slant nonetheless.

Why do such people get elected? Name recognition gives voters a sense of stability. Ireland is not alone in this, it's just that it's pretty endemic compared to most of the developed World.

But ultimately its because voters are dumb. Really. Go to a count if you don't believe me and see how many ballot sheets are filled out with the preferences in alphabetical order.

dresden8

The Corinthian wrote: »

But ultimately its because voters are dumb. Really. Go to a count if you don't believe me and see how many ballot sheets are filled out with the preferences in alphabetical order.

Is that story about O'Cuiv true?

On ballot papers he's

Cuiv, Eamonn O.

I suppose it explains why Beverley Flynn is Cooper-Flynn.

The Corinthian

Or how, supposedly, Frank Ross became Proinsias De Rossa.

Doing a quick tot-up (so there may be some inaccuracy) of the current Dail, of the 166 members, 53 have surnames that begin with the first four letters of the alphabet - which is 32%. If this is a higher percentage of how surnames are distributed in the larger population, then you have your proof.

The_Minister

Toiresea (sp?) Ferris is running for MEP for SF.

And I think its because the children of TDs have a good launching platform.
When FG's Eugene Regan called around, he had his daughters with him. Most TDs would bring their children around on the canvass, so they get to meet lots of people.

The Corinthian

The_Minister wrote: »

And I think its because the children of TDs have a good launching platform.
When FG's Eugene Regan called around, he had his daughters with him. Most TDs would bring their children around on the canvass, so they get to meet lots of people.

Doesn't really explain why it's not as commonplace outside of Ireland though.

The_Minister

The Corinthian wrote: »

Doesn't really explain why it's not as commonplace outside of Ireland though.

Bill Clinton ---> Hillary Clinton--->Chelsea Clinton
George Bush Snr

---

>Jeb Bush---->George Bush Jnr

Mussolini's granddaughter.....

We have more than other countries, but we aren't that far ahead.

getz

sounds as if ireland is getting itself ready to join the commonwealth [hereditary titles]

mike65

Its a reflection of small town Ireland, your dad was cock of the walk for 30 years everyone is expecting you to stand, the local party wants you to stand, so you stand.

Mike

The Corinthian

The_Minister wrote: »

We have more than other countries, but we aren't that far ahead.

Actually I believe you'll find that an unnaturally high proportion of elected politicians, even in the cabinet, is either a direct heir or a member of a political family, so Ireland's pretty far ahead in reality.

dresden8

Quick search on internet (may not be entirely accurate) suggests 1 TD for every 25,500 people whereas in the UK its 1 MP for approximately 72,000.

Is our system much more "intimate" and lends itself to TD's pressing a greater proportion of the flesh on their rounds with daddy on their apprenticeship tours?

lostexpectation

its disgusting

The Corinthian

dresden8 wrote: »

Quick search on internet (may not be entirely accurate) suggests 1 TD for every 25,500 people whereas in the UK its 1 MP for approximately 72,000.

Could well be at least one of the reasons for this, but it certainly does not make it acceptable.

Hotblack Desiato

The Corinthian wrote: »

Another two on the horizon looking to enter the family business are Garrett Tuberty (brother of Ryan

Nobody can stand Ryan Tubridy, so why on earth would anyone vote for his brother?

mike65

Eh? Loads of loverly middle aged wimmins adore Ryan, thats why they'd vote for his brother. You are out of touch!

Mike

The Corinthian

ninja900 wrote: »

Nobody can stand Ryan Tubridy, so why on earth would anyone vote for his brother?

In fairness to them both they are actually chalk and cheese - completely different characters. Garrett is actually quite a competent indiviual in his own right, and I would not question his ability to hold public office, only observing that he does fall into into this nepotistic stereotype that is so common in Irish politics.

simu

How would you tackle this? A ban on the sons and daughters of politicains in standing for office?

This "hereditary principle" is deeply entrenched in Irish people, even intelligent ones. The only cure I see is if people started thinking more critically about politicians but don't expect to see that anytime soon.

We're not anti-aristocratic; we just resent the British aristocracy (whilst still being somewhat fascinated by them).

The Corinthian

simu wrote: »

This "hereditary principle" is deeply entrenched in Irish people, even intelligent ones. The only cure I see is if people started thinking more critically about politicians but don't expect to see that anytime soon.

See? Democracy doesn't work - when are people just going to accept that?

We're not anti-aristocratic; we just resent the British aristocracy (whilst still being somewhat fascinated by them).

The Irish are anti-aristocratic in that the British aristocracy was the only one that they (I'm wearing my non-Irish hat now) had. I'm not suggesting that aristocracy is a good system, but objecting to an honours system on the basis that it is related to aristocracy always struck me as taking this aversion to silly extremes... but this is going seriously OT.

Mr.Micro

simu wrote: »

How would you tackle this? A ban on the sons and daughters of politicains in standing for office?

This "hereditary principle" is deeply entrenched in Irish people, even intelligent ones. The only cure I see is if people started thinking more critically about politicians but don't expect to see that anytime soon.

We're not anti-aristocratic; we just resent the British aristocracy (whilst still being somewhat fascinated by them).

We do'nt stop there, hell we copy most of their legislation. Of course we wait for them to solve a problem then we copy it and claim it as our own work. The most recent example I can think of is the 2 years that foreign workers have to pay taxe prsi etc before they can claim dole. Perhaps we should copy their budget as they appear unable to do one here now that there is no money rolling in?

Darragh29

mike65 wrote: »

Its a reflection of small town Ireland, your dad was cock of the walk for 30 years everyone is expecting you to stand, the local party wants you to stand, so you stand.

Mike

Agreed, I think that whatever gene deals with brass necks is more to do with it than anything else, certainly in the case of the Flynn's of Mayo anyway...

Hotblack Desiato

mike65 wrote: »

Eh? Loads of loverly middle aged wimmins adore Ryan, thats why they'd vote for his brother. You are out of touch!

Yes, yes I am out of touch with middle-aged wimmins. Perhaps there is a support group I can join.

The Corinthian wrote:

In fairness to them both they are actually chalk and cheese - completely different characters. Garrett is actually quite a competent indiviual in his own right, and I would not question his ability to hold public office

No doubt, but your more cynical types like my good self would just conclude 'vote buying ploy, and his brother is such a wnaker, apples don't fall far from the tree' and vote Anyone But Turgidy.

only observing that he does fall into into this nepotistic stereotype that is so common in Irish politics.

Is there a word for nepotism, that involves siblings? We already have Upton, and Tubridy would be another one... why am I expecting him to be voted in anyway, sigh.

nesf

dresden8 wrote: »

Quick search on internet (may not be entirely accurate) suggests 1 TD for every 25,500 people whereas in the UK its 1 MP for approximately 72,000.

Well it's a crucial point that many people forget when comparing our political system to ones in other country. We've an extremely high politician to citizen ratio (mainly because of the idea that you need over a hundred people in a parliament for even a halfway competent cabinet to be formed simply because the public don't tend to vote for the most competent candidates a lot of the time, mainly down to the public not having a bull's notion of what a TD actually has to do, never mind a Minister).

dresden8 wrote: »

Is our system much more "intimate" and lends itself to TD's pressing a greater proportion of the flesh on their rounds with daddy on their apprenticeship tours?

Essentially it's more that a TD can maintain a level of personal contact with their electorate that is practically impossible for politicians in other countries because they need to reach so few. This makes inheriting the family business far more likely in our political system for a variety of reasons.

The Corinthian wrote:

Could well be at least one of the reasons for this, but it certainly does not make it acceptable.

Honestly, when talking about politics it's not whether things are acceptable but whether they are probable. It's a bit like how the party who are in power most often will tend to be more corrupt than other parties. It doesn't make corruption in any way acceptable but it's a tendency that exists whether we like it or not. Our small scale political system is going to give us very different politicians with very different skillsets than the bigger system of the US Senate for instance where the Senator to voter ratio is over an order of magnitude bigger than what we have here with our TDs.

Voipjunkie

The Corinthian wrote: »

Could well be at least one of the reasons for this, but it certainly does not make it acceptable.

These people are elected they have the same mandate as any other elected TD whether their Father, Mother, Brother or anyone else had a seat before them.

There is no inheritance they put themselves forward and the people can choose or reject them nothing unacceptable about it people are not forced into electing them they do it of there own free will.

The Corinthian

Voipjunkie wrote: »

These people are elected they have the same mandate as any other elected TD whether their Father, Mother, Brother or anyone else had a seat before them.

But that really isn't true - remember in a representative democracy, before they are elected, they are selected.

This means they are put forward by their respective political parties where family ties will give them an unfair advantage to those party members who are unconnected by blood.

By the time Joe Public gets to choose, they've already received their 'inheritance' - the party ticket.

Voipjunkie

The Corinthian wrote: »

But that really isn't true - remember in a representative democracy, before they are elected, they are selected.

This means they are put forward by their respective political parties where family ties will give them an unfair advantage to those party members who are unconnected by blood.

By the time Joe Public gets to choose, they've already received their 'inheritance' - the party ticket.

I don't see what your complaint is here they are selected by their parties ( or they could choose to run as an independent as many do if unsuccessful at convention)

At the end of the day they only get elected because the Irish people vote for them the Irish people are not under any pressure or undue influence they can choose them or not if they elect them there is nothing unacceptable about it.

Having a recognisable name is an advantage but thats all it is but that is not confined to Ireland. It is true the world over as long as the election is free and fair anyone can stand for election and the people make there choice whether

What is your suggestion that direct relatives of former politicians be debarred from politics hardly very democratic is it.

The Corinthian

Voipjunkie wrote: »

I don't see what your complaint is here they are selected by their parties ( or they could choose to run as an independent as many do if unsuccessful at convention)

Of course they could run as independents - and most likely lose. Only a fool would deny that the nature of representative democracy is heavily biased in favour of (mainstream) political parties and the 'party machine' that they can employ at election time.

At the end of the day they only get elected because the Irish people vote for them the Irish people are not under any pressure or undue influence they can choose them or not if they elect them there is nothing unacceptable about it.

If you accept that being on a mainstream party ticket gives one a significant advantage in getting elected over an independent or someone in a fringe party (with limited resources for electioneering) and you accept that being related to a politician gives one a significant advantage in getting that ticket, then the conclusion is pretty inevitable.

What is your suggestion that direct relatives of former politicians be debarred from politics hardly very democratic is it.

I never suggested any such thing. I made an observation that direct relatives of (former) politicians appear to have an unfair advantage in entering political office. I did not suggest any means of remedying it, nor did I suggest that, as individuals, they may not deserve to be elected.

However, the fact remains that Ireland does appear to have a significant number of Oireachtais peerages, even when compared to other western democracy, and neither is this terribly acceptable.

Voipjunkie

The Corinthian wrote: »

Of course they could run as independents - and most likely lose. Only a fool would deny that the nature of representative democracy is heavily biased in favour of (mainstream) political parties and the 'party machine' that they can employ at election time.

If you accept that being on a mainstream party ticket gives one a significant advantage in getting elected over an independent or someone in a fringe party (with limited resources for electioneering) and you accept that being related to a politician gives one a significant advantage in getting that ticket, then the conclusion is pretty inevitable.

I never suggested any such thing. I made an observation that direct relatives of (former) politicians appear to have an unfair advantage in entering political office. I did not suggest any means of remedying it, nor did I suggest that, as individuals, they may not deserve to be elected.

However, the fact remains that Ireland does appear to have a significant number of Oireachtais peerages, even when compared to other western democracy, and neither is this terribly acceptable.

Baloney you are moving from the idea of advantage to peerage while ignoring the fact that these people are elected and that the reason that these people have an advantage is because of the way people are.

Political parties choose relatives because people vote for them it is not that political parties are forcing relatives of former politicians upon the electorate but rather that Irish people and people in general around the world vote by their own free will for people related to people they voted for before.
If people stopped doing that then political parties would stop selecting them.

There is nothing unusual in sons and daughters following their Mothers and Fathers in their chosen profession whether that is as a Baker or a Binman or in the Army or the Police or as a Politician.

And Ireland is in no way unusual in that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_political_families


Its not like this is North Korea or Cuba where a family member is selected by the predecessor and thats the way it is at the end of the day it is the free will of the Irish people to vote or not to vote for these people.

I just dont see how you view the will of the Irish people as being unacceptable

lostexpectation

they depend on name recognition, its cheap politics

The Corinthian

Voipjunkie wrote: »

Baloney you are moving from the idea of advantage to peerage while ignoring the fact that these people are elected and that the reason that these people have an advantage is because of the way people are.

No, the advantage is because of the fact that they can get on a party ticket easier and party tickets have, in turn, a much better chance of getting elected. Without using finger puppets, I don't really know how much clearer I can be with you on this.

When that unfair advantage becomes significant (and having an advantage by virtue of birth is considered unfair by most), then you enter the dangerous waters of having de facto peerages - where political offices are passed down from generation to generation.

And Ireland is in no way unusual in that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_political_families

No, Ireland is not alone in this, however we do have a pretty high number of such 'inherited' seats by any Western standards.

Its not like this is North Korea or Cuba where a family member is selected by the predecessor and thats the way it is at the end of the day it is the free will of the Irish people to vote or not to vote for these people.

Well, actually, Iran is a better example; there people can elect whoever they want - from a short list that's been chosen behind closed doors. The party political system is not dissimilar except one can run outside of the mainstream parties - but without their resources almost certainly lose.

I just dont see how you view the will of the Irish people as being unacceptable

Nice try at turning the issue around, but no cigar. If you present an electorate with a limited selection, how are they truly expressing their will? Or do you believe that their will is best 'guided' by those who know best?

I take it you are a member of one of the major political parties?

TheEnforcer

Wait a minute, did BIFFO not give a major interview after he got the job. He said he "fell" into politics. And then you look into his history and his grandad BIFFO was a founding member of the party, and his oul boy was also in it.

Bit like the US, its an old boy network.

Voipjunkie

The Corinthian wrote: »

No, the advantage is because of the fact that they can get on a party ticket easier and party tickets have, in turn, a much better chance of getting elected. Without using finger puppets, I don't really know how much clearer I can be with you on this.

When that unfair advantage becomes significant (and having an advantage by virtue of birth is considered unfair by most), then you enter the dangerous waters of having de facto peerages - where political offices are passed down from generation to generation.

No, Ireland is not alone in this, however we do have a pretty high number of such 'inherited' seats by any Western standards.

Well, actually, Iran is a better example; there people can elect whoever they want - from a short list that's been chosen behind closed doors. The party political system is not dissimilar except one can run outside of the mainstream parties - but without their resources almost certainly lose.

Nice try at turning the issue around, but no cigar. If you present an electorate with a limited selection, how are they truly expressing their will? Or do you believe that their will is best 'guided' by those who know best?

I take it you are a member of one of the major political parties?

Please that has to be the most laughable post I have read in a while Ireland is like Iran

Do you really believe that honestly hand on heart believe that. Well let me point out that unlike Iran anyone can stand for election and do not need the approval of unelected Mullahs.
As such Irish people have the choice of Large party canidates and small party canidates and independents.

Apart from the last election when relatively few independent TDs were elected there are a relatively large number of non party or small party TDs elected not just to the Dail but to the European Parliament and the various local councils.

Obviously large organised parties have an advantage but that is why they are large organised parties.

It seems to me that you have a problem with democracy and that you dont trust the people to make up their own mind.
I can think of numerous examples in the last 20 years where parties have attempted to parachute canidates in to take advantage of name recognition and have lost spectacularly and having huge resources guarantees nothing.
Think of the sandwich king that FG dropped into Dublin North East high profile apparently unlimited resources but he lost to his running mate a previously unheard of local councillor with very limited resources.

At the end of the day the people make up their own mind whilst we may despair at it sometimes we have to respect it

And no I am not a member of any political party and I have never voted for anyone because of their name.

The Corinthian

Voipjunkie wrote: »

Please that has to be the most laughable post I have read in a while Ireland is like Iran

Do you really believe that honestly hand on heart believe that. Well let me point out that unlike Iran anyone can stand for election and do not need the approval of unelected Mullahs.
As such Irish people have the choice of Large party canidates and small party canidates and independents.

Giving the electorate a de facto shortlist decided upon outside of the democratic process is essentially what happens in Ireland - by gombeen men rather than mullahs though. The only difference between Ireland and Iran is that one can still run as an independent, but given your chances of getting elected as one are a fraction of those for a mainstream candidate.

Simply saying that anyone can put their name on the ballot sheet, does not make an election democratic. Russia has been severely criticized for a similar situation whereby the resources available to government candidates have given then an almost unassailable advantage.

Ireland is nowhere near as bad as either Russia or Iran, but nonetheless neither is it perfect. I find it disturbing that any examination of the democratic process should be treated in such a defensive manner by anyone.

Apart from the last election when relatively few independent TDs were elected there are a relatively large number of non party or small party TDs elected not just to the Dail but to the European Parliament and the various local councils.

I like the use of "relatively large number" here, betraying that in absolute terms this number is not in any way large.

Obviously large organised parties have an advantage but that is why they are large organised parties.

And given that they are free to act in an anti-democratic fashion, is this a good thing?

It seems to me that you have a problem with democracy and that you dont trust the people to make up their own mind.

Not at all. I am questioning the efficiency of the checks and balances that presently exist in representative democracies. When undemocratic institutions (such as the occult machinations of political parties) gain too strong an influence and can distort or manipulate the democratic process, then of course one should question this - or should we simply ask no questions for fear of being accused of being anti-democratic?

I can think of numerous examples in the last 20 years where parties have attempted to parachute canidates in to take advantage of name recognition and have lost spectacularly and having huge resources guarantees nothing.

I never suggested anything is guaranteed. An unfair advantage is not a guarantee.

And no I am not a member of any political party and I have never voted for anyone because of their name.

Sure.

Voipjunkie

The Corinthian wrote: »

Giving the electorate a de facto shortlist decided upon outside of the democratic process is essentially what happens in Ireland - by gombeen men rather than mullahs though. The only difference between Ireland and Iran is that one can still run as an independent, but given your chances of getting elected as one are a fraction of those for a mainstream candidate.

Stop please all elections involve a shortlist bar we all put our names forward for election.
And the utter nonsense that the only difference between Ireland and Iran is the ability to run as an independent try setting up and running a non islamist political party in Iran not to mention exercising your right to free speech or demonstrate

The Corinthian wrote: »

Simply saying that anyone can put their name on the ballot sheet, does not make an election democratic. Russia has been severely criticized for a similar situation whereby the resources available to government candidates have given then an almost unassailable advantage.

Actually the criticism is the use of massive state resources and the murder and suppression of any kind of descent that coupled with a media that is under complete government control.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Ireland is nowhere near as bad as either Russia or Iran, but nonetheless neither is it perfect. I find it disturbing that any examination of the democratic process should be treated in such a defensive manner by anyone.

And where is perfect if you find that utopia give us a shout in the mean time I'll take Irish democracy over most of the alternatives including the "democracy" practised in the some of the leading free nations of the world.
My problem is not with your examination of the democratic process but the nonsense about hereditary peerages and inherited seats.

The Corinthian wrote: »

I like the use of "relatively large number" here, betraying that in absolute terms this number is not in any way large.

Compare it to our nearest neighbour I would say it is huge and gives lie to your claims that it is nearly impossible

The Corinthian wrote: »

And given that they are free to act in an anti-democratic fashion, is this a good thing?

what anti democratic fashion are you particularly referring to

The Corinthian wrote: »

Not at all. I am questioning the efficiency of the checks and balances that presently exist in representative democracies. When undemocratic institutions (such as the occult machinations of political parties) gain too strong an influence and can distort or manipulate the democratic process, then of course one should question this - or should we simply ask no questions for fear of being accused of being anti-democratic?

how are political parties undemocratic

Membership is open to all citizens and candidates are chosen by the membership
The leadership is then elected by the membership or by the elected representatives of the party or a combination

The Corinthian wrote: »

I never suggested anything is guaranteed. An unfair advantage is not a guarantee.

hereditary, inherited , peerage all suggest a guarantee of success which is obviously untrue
whilst name recognition and a party support may give a candidate a head start nobody ( except the Ceann Comhairle) is sure of anything among the names I have seen mentioned in this thread

O' Malley
Spring
Cosgrave

Where are they everyone of them was of course helped by having a recognised surname and everyone of them got the bums rush from the electorate eventually.

And what is your proposal a ban on political parties or perhaps a ban on surnames or maybe you would prefer that relatives of former politicians would be banned from standing for election

The Corinthian wrote: »

Sure.

I'm absolutely positive but you can choose to believe whatever suits you

lostexpectation

"whilst name recognition and a party support may give a candidate a head start nobody"

this is what we complaining about, cheap name recognition.

ninty9er

There's An surprisingly high number in FF, but I don't think it's a particularly bad thing. They've grown up around public service, so can't exactly say they didn't expect the long hours and on call nature of the job.

In FF currently you have a large proportion, but wasn't Henry Kenny a TD for Mayo West, and Richard's brother was Taoiseach, Kieran O'Donnell got elected on rural votes that would have associated him with the strong constituency work of his uncle Tom.

Likewise we have
Áine Brady, Michael Kitt, Tom Kitt, not to forget Áine's husband Gerry >>> children of Michael Kitt.

Mary and John Hanafin >>>> children of Des Hanafin

Mary Coughlan >>> Daughter of Cathal, niece of Clement.

I could go on and on....for all parties, but it doesn't mean they're elected on the name, as many cousins will have failed to get elected to County Councils etc...across parties. People will also be reluctant to vote for someone where they are not seeing results....and clearly that is not the case in general, or we'd have a Dáil of independents and a new government at the rise of every new moon.

lostexpectation

yeah we've had great results lately lol,education,economy, health, give me a break.

ninty9er

lostexpectation wrote: »

yeah we've had great results lately lol,education,economy, health, give me a break.

Did i hear the needle slipping on the gramaphone there?? :rolleyes::rolleyes:

Voipjunkie

lostexpectation wrote: »

"whilst name recognition and a party support may give a candidate a head start nobody"

this is what we complaining about, cheap name recognition.

Ok but what are you suggesting

As long as people vote that way parties will pick candidates to take advantage of it.
It is not the political parties fault and there is NOTHING that can be done about it as someone with a recognised name has as much right to stand for election as anyone else.
Your complaint is about human nature a recognised name ( and possibly a sympathy element following the death of a relative) adds a couple of thousand votes to your candidate political parties want to win elections so they choose candidates that they think will give them the best chance of that.
But at the end of the day if those candidates or representatives don't put the work in they will either not succeed or they will not hold on to the seat.

Voipjunkie

lostexpectation wrote: »

yeah we've had great results lately lol,education,economy, health, give me a break.

So presumably you believe that the world recession has happened because both our Taoiseach and Finance Minister are sons of former TDs.

It seems so obvious now that you say it lets get rid of anyone in Leinster house who has a relation who was previously elected to anything and that will reduce class sizes and fix the health system.

ninty9er

Voipjunkie wrote: »

So presumably you believe that the world recession has happened because both our Taoiseach and Finance Minister are sons of former TDs.

It seems so obvious now that you say it lets get rid of anyone in Leinster house who has a relation who was previously elected to anything and that will reduce class sizes and fix the health system.

It'd certainly put a nice dent in the Dáil and Seanad.

The Corinthian

Voipjunkie wrote: »

Stop please all elections involve a shortlist bar we all put our names forward for election.
And the utter nonsense that the only difference between Ireland and Iran is the ability to run as an independent try setting up and running a non islamist political party in Iran not to mention exercising your right to free speech or demonstrate

Why are you deliberately misinterpreting what I posted?

Compare it to our nearest neighbour I would say it is huge and gives lie to your claims that it is nearly impossible

I think you'll find the level of nepotism in the UK is a fraction of what it is in the Republic.

what anti democratic fashion are you particularly referring to

Internal party politics are often anything but democratic - the political 'shaft' is alive and well in FF, FG, et al. Given you've never been involved in party politics, I wouldn't expect you to know this...

Membership is open to all citizens and candidates are chosen by the membership

Not exactly. Political parties will often operate using less than democratic processes internally, with candidates being short-listed without so much as a consultation, let alone a vote, with the greater membership and even when votes do take place the shenanigans that will take place are laughably Machiavellian.

hereditary, inherited , peerage all suggest a guarantee of success which is obviously untrue

I never suggested any guarantee and have repeatedly rejected that it is a guarantee. Again, you appear to be deliberately misrepresenting my posts.

And what is your proposal a ban on political parties or perhaps a ban on surnames or maybe you would prefer that relatives of former politicians would be banned from standing for election

I've not proposed any solution, let alone suggest a ban on political parties or surnames. Again, you appear to be deliberately misrepresenting my posts.

I'm absolutely positive but you can choose to believe whatever suits you

Well, your defence of the way that political parties interpret democracy internally would lead me to believe that either you have a vested interest or a great deal of naivety.

Voipjunkie

The Corinthian wrote: »

I've not proposed any solution, let alone suggest a ban on political parties or surnames. Again, you appear to be deliberately misrepresenting my posts.

Right so you have no ideas on how to change it content to moan about it.

The Corinthian wrote: »

Well, your defence of the way that political parties interpret democracy internally would lead me to believe that either you have a vested interest or a great deal of naivety.

I'm neither naive nor have I a vested interest in any political party but it is laughable that you compare Ireland to Iran and then accuse me of naivety.

Honestly I have read a lot of your posts on here and normally you seem like a fairly rational person don't agree with most of it but some of the stuff you have posted in this thread is off the wall.

Actually looking back it seems like you are almost bitter to the extent that you have lost your normal objectivity. Your not a defeated candidate at a selection convention by any chance are you.

ninty9er

The Corinthian wrote: »

Internal party politics are often anything but democratic - the political 'shaft' is alive and well in FF, FG, et al. Given you've never been involved in party politics, I wouldn't expect you to know this...

This is a sad, but true fact of party politics all over the planet....even in Russia:D:D

The Corinthian

Voipjunkie wrote: »

Right so you have no ideas on how to change it content to moan about it.

Sure, why not?

I'm neither naive nor have I a vested interest in any political party but it is laughable that you compare Ireland to Iran and then accuse me of naivety.

Making a comparison does not imply that they are the same, and I made this quite clear. However, even if Ireland and Iran are not in the same 'democratic' league, that does not mean that they cannot share some, even tenuous similarities - to deny that possibility would be the hight of arrogance.

Honestly I have read a lot of your posts on here and normally you seem like a fairly rational person don't agree with most of it but some of the stuff you have posted in this thread is off the wall.

It's not really all that off the wall. I'm not saying that such nepotistic practices are the doom of democracy, only that they're 'democratically inefficient', as it were. As with business practices that are continually examined and reformed to avoid corruption (which is by definition where unfair advantage can be exploited), it doesn't hurt for us to do the same for democracy, so that we may perhaps fine tune it.

Actually looking back it seems like you are almost bitter to the extent that you have lost your normal objectivity. Your not a defeated candidate at a selection convention by any chance are you.

Good grief, no. I never had the common touch necessary with politics, and have known this from an early age. I've always practised my politics through donations and contra deals instead.

Voipjunkie

The Corinthian wrote: »

. I've always practised my politics through donations and contra deals instead.

I would have been more a sandinista supporter myself

lostexpectation

boom and bust wasn't just worldwide policy it was an irish policy, the incestuous nature leads to lack of transformation from generation to generation, which is why we still have religious orders owning our schools and hospitals, it also ads to the clinetism,and old boy network,(old family netwrok), that leads to complaceny arrogance and corruption,vopijunky your are just defending low standards,you may be happy with lows standrads im amn't, the parties could choose by other then name recongition.

Voipjunkie

lostexpectation wrote: »

boom and bust wasn't just worldwide policy it was an irish policy, the incestuous nature leads to lack of transformation from generation to generation, which is why we still have religious orders owning our schools and hospitals, it also ads to the clinetism,and old boy network,(old family netwrok), that leads to complaceny arrogance and corruption,vopijunky your are just defending low standards,you may be happy with lows standrads im amn't, the parties could choose by other then name recongition.

Boom and Bust are features of capitalism live with it even Gordon Brown could not stop the cycle much as he kidded himself he had.

I am not defending low standard I'm saying that the system is that way because we the people have it that way.
Look at Dublin South FF are trying to convince young brennan to run for his late fathers seat why because FF know that the combination of the name Brennan and the sympathy factor will add a couple of thousand votes onto his tally. Is that FFs fault or is it the fault of the people.
FF are going to select the person that gives them the best chance of winning end of story.
That said young brennan will not win just by turning up and he will have to keep working or he will lose his seat no matter what his name is( of course presuming he wins or runs)

lostexpectation

yes it is ff fault!!!!

ninty9er

lostexpectation wrote: »

yes it is ff fault!!!!

Henry Kenny - Enda Kenny??

John Bruton - Richard Bruton??

Whose fault did you say it was???

Because it's certainly not the political establishment.