Politics and Degeneration

Denerick · 23-05-2009 1:04pm #1

Does electoral democracy ultimately always degenerate into a vain and irrelevant ego match between two groups who fundamentally have the same ideology?

Permabear · 23-05-2009 3:04pm

This post has been deleted.

Denerick · 23-05-2009 6:54pm

Here's a better question; Is there anything inherently wrong with that?

turgon · 23-05-2009 10:26pm

There is everything wrong with that. How can we claim to be so democratic when, given that each of the 3 options are the same, we really dont have a choice?

Belfast · 23-05-2009 10:35pm

Denerick wrote: »

Here's a better question; Is there anything inherently wrong with that?

Yes because it deprives the people of a real choice and is a sign of a failed political system.

Belfast · 23-05-2009 10:40pm

Denerick wrote: »

Does electoral democracy ultimately always degenerate into a vain and irrelevant ego match between two groups who fundamentally have the same ideology?

Electoral democracy on its own probably will degenerate into a vain and irrelevant ego match between two groups who fundamentally have the same ideology.
A Republic with
a well written constitution
separation of powers
independent free media
a political literate voting public
and strict term limits for all office holders might stand a chance.

Denerick · 24-05-2009 12:05am

What I'm trying to get at is suggest that perhaps ego based superficial politics is the best of a bad situation (And there is no doubt in my mind that humanity is fundamentally greedy, power hungry, selfish, barbrous and murderous). The reason why I believe it is a good thing is because while a few people argue over essentially the same thing, the general public can get on with their lives free from their constraint. Its only when groups are fanatical or self righteous that liberty is threatened. Under a system where irrelevancy is the dominant political order, all people are free to live their own lives within a liberal social system.

So when I see Enda Kenny and Biffo argue over tax hikes, when FG would no doubt have done the exact same if in power, I can sit back and marvel that nobody is seriously considering any extreme measures - such as radical protectionism or the 'looting' of the banks and a degeneration to an anarchic state of nature. We all accept this political system, warts and all, and somehow it manages to preserve our liberty and at the same time consciously turn us off politics and focus on life.

Denerick · 24-05-2009 12:09am

turgon wrote: »

There is everything wrong with that. How can we claim to be so democratic when, given that each of the 3 options are the same, we really dont have a choice?

I argue that we don't need or want a choice really. Liberty is threatened by extremists. By keeping irrelevant politicians in power (and accepting the prevailing political order) we are also guaranteeing our liberty. Personal liberty is much more important to me than some simple populist leader trying to look different and manipulate the simple. (Which is what seems to happen in South America quite a lot - think Chavez)

And I also strongly question the prevailing consensus that 'Democracy' is anything to be revered. Democracy is tyranny by any other name. Democratic Republics with strong power-reducing Constitutions work best.

Denerick · 24-05-2009 12:25am

Another example of a corrupt populist in power, Mr. Berlusconi (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/24/silvio-berlusconi-la-repubblica-inquiry)

turgon · 24-05-2009 9:48am

Tbh Denerick, if personal liberty is a very important part of your dream for government, Im surprised your not lamenting the lack of a liberal party that would increase personal liberty, both socially and economically.

And when I talk about choice, I do not mean extremist or anything. Just to be able to choose different ideologies that are compatible with my own.

Denerick · 24-05-2009 9:53am

Is political activism important really? Were a Liberal party to arrive they would eventually degenerate into the center - especially if they get into to power. We've seen it with both the PDs and the Greens.

is_that_so · 24-05-2009 10:36am

Belfast wrote: »

Yes because it deprives the people of a real choice and is a sign of a failed political system.

Why is that a failure? What is your understanding of real choice? Political systems are not there to satisfy personal perceptions. Parties move to where they will generate most votes and justify their existence and therefore enact their policies.

A scenario with two major political forces merely emphasises the difficulty that we have seeing beyond two sides of the same argument. Parties mirror us to an extent. Too much choice risks producing instability. Israel and Italy are extremely good examples where this in fact can lead to a failed political system which produces no clear answers and is subject to the whims of smaller minorities.

If there is any failure it is in the lack of engagement of the public with political systems, partly due to its perceived complexity and mostly because the public at large couldn't be bothered.

turgon · 24-05-2009 10:44am

But the PD's changed the country even though they arent around anymore. Low taxes became the slogan of every party. But I dont think they stuck to their ideals enough and that why they suffered.

I think ye are all just being fatalist. We have a **** political system in Ireland. The two parties came out of Civil War bickering and because of the ignorance of FF's founder. And we suffer to this day with two parties that mirror each other and give us no choice.

Ye seem to be arguing that the lack of choice is a good thing. But, as are some people opinions, the one choice we are given (DF: "social democracy) is not up to scratch to many. And yet ye say we should just accept this?

Denerick · 24-05-2009 10:51am

turgon wrote: »

But the PD's changed the country even though they arent around anymore. Low taxes became the slogan of every party. But I dont think they stuck to their ideals enough and that why they suffered.

I think ye are all just being fatalist. We have a **** political system in Ireland. The two parties came out of Civil War bickering and because of the ignorance of FF's founder. And we suffer to this day with two parties that mirror each other and give us no choice.

Ye seem to be arguing that the lack of choice is a good thing. But, as are some people opinions, the one choice we are given (DF: "social democracy) is not up to scratch to many. And yet ye say we should just accept this?

I think we should. What difference will anything make? So long as my personal liberty and ability to live my life free from totalitarian government is secure then I am happy to live my life free from politics.

I just can't understand why people think politics is a good thing. Its best when its in the background.

In my opinion the function of government is to make sure the buses run on time, that hospitals have enough nurses and that taxes are collected in order to run adequate public services. The Obama-esque Camalot politics is just an illusion, a painful one at that.

The problem has always been, from the beginning of mankind when we decided to group ourselves into political units, that one person wants to manipulate other people so as to get political power. And the greatest achievement of mankind has been to find a way to limit anyone's political power. Which is why I think we have the perfect system.

is_that_so · 24-05-2009 11:03am

The PDs did but like all small parties they fade away. They did not have strong enough ideology and much of what they ended up standing for was easily absorbed. The Civil War mentality persists because it suits us not to change it. Some of that is down to the generational votes but some is also due to the fact that the anger and apathy some parts of the voting public express towards it is not translated into votes for a different type of representation.

Wrapped in our traditional political conservatism our system serves us, even though we carp on excessively about it. If it is broken we are in part to blame as we continue to maintain the status quo. There are unquestionably some very serious issues about it that need to be addressed, but that does not make it a defunct or inherently broken system.

turgon · 24-05-2009 1:59pm

Denerick wrote: »

I think we should. What difference will anything make?

A huge difference. Consider the difference in the US if John McCain would have been elected.

Denerick wrote: »

In my opinion the function of government is to make sure the buses run on time, that hospitals have enough nurses and that taxes are collected in order to run adequate public services

I would disagree. Government is crap at running services. Take a look at Britian where privatised transport has lowered prices drastically. One of my friend was on a hour and a half train - return was £10. The 3 hour return to Dublin is 70. Its government incompetence.

And look at the health service.

Denerick wrote: »

And the greatest achievement of mankind has been to find a way to limit anyone's political power. Which is why I think we have the perfect system.

I would have to disagree. The idea of checks and balances doesnt even come close in Irelands government.

Denerick · 24-05-2009 2:12pm

John Mc Cain and Barack Obama did have differences but nothing which affects the fundamental structure - IE, Liberal democracy, reverence of the constitution etc. Bush was an evil man who took a piss on the constitution while in office. I'm not saying there aren't clear cut differences in American politics, but one must admit that its very much the case that in Ireland very little seperates the big three.

There certainly are checks and balances in the Irish government. Elections are a check on parliament. Parliament a check on the people. The constitution a check on the government. Parliament a check on the government. The rule of law a check on the government. The media acts as the oil which keeps the thing moving. We're supposed to be active and interested citizens, but it doesn't really matter if we're not. So long as the people in power argue over minutae and lock ego's, they aren't really considering anything radical, which in turn doesn't effect my personal liberty.

Belfast · 24-05-2009 7:26pm

Denerick wrote: »

John Mc Cain and Barack Obama did have differences but nothing which affects the fundamental structure - IE, Liberal democracy, reverence of the constitution etc.

John Mc Cain and Barack Obama do not have any respect for the constitution.

Denerick wrote: »

Bush was an evil man who took a piss on the constitution while in office. I'm not saying there aren't clear cut differences in American politics, but one must admit that its very much the case that in Ireland very little seperates the big three.

Bush did piss on the constitution while in office. no much difference between the big 3 here.

Denerick wrote: »

There certainly are checks and balances in the Irish government.

some but not enough

Denerick wrote: »

Elections are a check on parliament.

No elections are a method of choosing who serves in the Dáil not a check on the power of the government.
The elector register is so far out of date I doubt if any election could be considered valid.

Denerick wrote: »

Parliament a check on the people.

I do not understand that one

Denerick wrote: »

The constitution a check on the government.

true

Denerick wrote: »

Parliament a check on the government.

As the goverment has a majority in Parliament I do not see how it can be a check on the goverement.

Denerick wrote: »

The rule of law a check on the government.

Rule of law has been ignored here for years both by the people and the government.

Denerick wrote: »

The media acts as the oil which keeps the thing moving. We're supposed to be active and interested citizens, but it doesn't really matter if we're not.

In practice this does not happen.

Denerick wrote: »

So long as the people in power argue over minutae and lock ego's, they aren't really considering anything radical, which in turn doesn't effect my personal liberty.

They have been taking away our liberties for years and most people have not noticed it until in affect them directly or some one they know.

Belfast · 24-05-2009 7:33pm

Denerick wrote: »

I argue that we don't need or want a choice really. Liberty is threatened by extremists. By keeping irrelevant politicians in power (and accepting the prevailing political order) we are also guaranteeing our liberty. Personal liberty is much more important to me than some simple populist leader trying to look different and manipulate the simple. (Which is what seems to happen in South America quite a lot - think Chavez)

And I also strongly question the prevailing consensus that 'Democracy' is anything to be revered. Democracy is tyranny by any other name. Democratic Republics with strong power-reducing Constitutions work best.

If we do not need choice why not have a King then instead of elections.

Both ff and fg and labour are populists parties.

But what is liberty without wisdom, and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without tuition or restraint.
Edmund Burke

Belfast · 24-05-2009 7:34pm

Denerick wrote: »

Another example of a corrupt populist in power, Mr. Berlusconi (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/24/silvio-berlusconi-la-repubblica-inquiry)

Just like CJ here.

,8,1 · 24-05-2009 7:39pm

The only thing liberals don't like about democracy is that sometimes the people vote conservatively. Then it becomes "tyranny" "the rule of the majority" etc.

On the whole though, democracy is easily tempered and fosters liberalism.

lmtduffy · 24-05-2009 7:51pm

Belfast wrote: »

The problem in Ireland is we have no choice. All political parties in the Dáil are pursuing more or less the same incompetent policies.
Having choices does not mean having extreme choices only.

incompetent in your opinion, are you really just angry that the vast majority of the people on this island dont want what your selling this goes for most of the posters on this thread.

I am Labour supporter so I do my best to convince people that the country would be better off with a labour government.

I suggest you do the same if you want to whatever your ideology(what ever that is worth) to be practised in this country.

Denerick · 24-05-2009 7:53pm

Elections get rid of parliamentarians who have performed unsatisfactorily. Parliaments have the power to overthrow governments. Government majorities are often weaker than they appear - all it takes are a few rebels and an entire government can be overthrown. Therefore parliaments are a check on government. Parliaments are a check on the people because the people cannot simply move on any whimsical desire they have at the time - parliaments are elected for a certain amount of years and in between that time the people have to put up with them, unless of course they can get enough political support to forcibly dissolve the government. In other words, the people have to wait to re-elect their parliaments and governments. The fact that parliaments are elected for a fixed term makes them a check on the people.

The media is the oil that keeps everything together; It is where us, the people, get our information from. Whatever you think about the media they still perform that function.

Belfast · 24-05-2009 7:54pm

is_that_so wrote: »

Why is that a failure? What is your understanding of real choice? Political systems are not there to satisfy personal perceptions. Parties move to where they will generate most votes and justify their existence and therefore enact their policies.

So you say the politicians are lead by the people and the purpose of a political party is only to be elected and has no other than to pursue populist short term policies even if they bankrupt the county and deprive people of liberty.

"Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion"
Edmund Burke

Denerick · 24-05-2009 7:57pm

Belfast wrote: »

If we do not need choice why not have a King then instead of elections.

I probably shouldn't have said that but yes, a constitutional monarch with a reasonable support base within the population is an additional check on the power of governments and people = therefore it is potentially a positive institution.

I'm saying the choice is pretty irrelevant. Thankfully Irish political parties aren't ideologically based; they can meet crises with rational responses as the situation requires, not some preconceived internal ideological code.

But what is liberty without wisdom, and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without tuition or restraint.
Edmund Burke

Take it easy on the quotes. Thats twice you've thrown in a quote without giving it much due consideration.

"And bewareth the man who shallst quote to thee, without thought of mind or reason, for that man is a cursed man." Deuteronomy 4:37.

Belfast · 24-05-2009 8:02pm

lmtduffy wrote: »

incompetent in your opinion,

who else's opinion would I be giving ?

lmtduffy wrote: »

are you really just angry that the vast majority of the people on this island dont want what your selling this goes for most of the posters on this thread.

Who said I am angry.

Now you are speaking for the majority of the people in Ireland ?

lmtduffy wrote: »

I am Labour supporter so I do my best to convince people that the country would be better off with a labour government.

What else would a labour supporter do?

lmtduffy wrote: »

I suggest you do the same if you want to whatever your ideology(what ever that is worth) to be practised in this country.

I do not understand that last point. Do you think I am try to purswade people that my ideas are wrong?

is_that_so · 24-05-2009 8:10pm

Belfast wrote: »

So you say the politicians are lead by the people and the purpose of a political party is only to be elected and has no other than to pursue populist sport therm policies even of they bankrupt the county and deprive people of liberty.

Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion.
Edmund Burke

I can only assume the version you allude to (I think) is where we have ended up. There were ample opportunities to address it and in that Burke was right. However the guilt by association for every political entity in the country is illogical and suggests to me that the quote sums up much of your own perception of the reality.

I make no apologies for political parties, nor defend what they can become. Political systems return what we choose or not choose to return. Populism is part of politics and of many other parts of modern life. It is not ideal but it is not wrong. But if that populism is based on what I perceive is a reasonable attempt and judgement to do the best for the country I have no objections to it.

I also agree on the quotes, a bit wildly cast about tbh.

Belfast · 24-05-2009 8:12pm

Denerick wrote: »

I probably shouldn't have said that but yes, a constitutional monarch with a reasonable support base within the population is an additional check on the power of governments and people = therefore it is potentially a positive institution.

It would not be my choice, but I can see the logic behind the idea.

Denerick wrote: »

I'm saying the choice is pretty irrelevant. Thankfully Irish political parties aren't ideologically based; they can meet crises with rational responses as the situation requires, not some preconceived internal ideological code.

There is nothing rational about the responses come up with by Irish politicians . An ideological is a guide not a strait jacket.
Keynesian economics is the ideological that most political parties follow in Ireland in economic matters.

Denerick · 24-05-2009 8:27pm

Eh no, its not. We've either adopted a very light neo Keynesian but by and large we have been neo-liberal if anything. Its J.M. Keynes 101 to take money of the economy when its booming and punch it back in when its not. We punched bags and bags of money in when it was booming and we're taking ludicrous amounts of it now that its not. Not a semblance of J.M. Keynes there whatsoever.

Belfast · 24-05-2009 8:31pm

Denerick wrote: »

I think we should. What difference will anything make? So long as my personal liberty and ability to live my life free from totalitarian government is secure then I am happy to live my life free from politics.

I would like to live a life free for politics.
Unfortunately politics and the state intrude in to almost all aspect of life in Ireland.

Denerick wrote: »

I just can't understand why people think politics is a good thing. Its best when its in the background.

I agree.

Denerick wrote: »

In my opinion the function of government is to make sure the buses run on time, that hospitals have enough nurses and that taxes are collected in order to run adequate public services.

I do not think government should be involved those things.

Denerick wrote: »

The Obama-esque Camalot politics is just an illusion, a painful one at that.

True. You hailed that one on the head.

Denerick wrote: »

The problem has always been, from the beginning of mankind when we decided to group ourselves into political units, that one person wants to manipulate other people so as to get political power. And the greatest achievement of mankind has been to find a way to limit anyone's political power. Which is why I think we have the perfect system.

I agree with you that limiting anyone's political power is important. I thing the states political power should be limited to a minimalist level.

If we ignore politics in the present climate as you advise then the politicians will leave us bankrupt and rob us of our liberty.

We have far from a perfect system.

Belfast · 24-05-2009 8:37pm

Denerick wrote: »

Eh no, its not. We've either adopted a very light neo Keynesian but by and large we have been neo-liberal if anything. Its J.M. Keynes 101 to take money of the economy when its booming and punch it back in when its not. We punched bags and bags of money in when it was booming and we're taking ludicrous amounts of it now that its not. Not a semblance of J.M. Keynes there whatsoever.

You are right about one thing what we have is a very bad copy of Keynesian economics.

if we had followed what you said "ts J.M. Keynes 101 to take money of the economy when its booming and punch it back in when its not." then we would not have been is as much trouble.

I am not a fan of Keynesian economics or neo-liberal.

I am more into the Austrian school of economics.

Denerick · 24-05-2009 8:45pm

My apologies. Thought you were a socialist actually!

I actually agree with you; there does need to be more checks and balances than there currently are. But for the present moment they have served us OK. Ireland is one of the few electoral democracies in the world that emerged from the ashes of WWI that has stood all that time in a continuous and unbroken state. Thats quite an achievement - it puts us in the same political culture as the USA and the UK.

And its not that I think we should be apathetic persé. I'm saying that getting hot and bothered about the particulars of party politics is absurd. As long as the base remains secure then we're Ok.

And if anything liberty has increased in Ireland over the 20 years. Dramatically so in fact. Personal liberty has increased exponentially. As has economic liberty. If we're talking about the UK you may have a point but certainly not Ireland.

And we disagree over the fundamentals of government. I see it primarily as a big public service - sort of like a management agency that ties all the complex services we need to have a tolerable standard of living. I'm guessing you desire greater privatisation. But I consider that to be a peripheral difference in the essentials of limiting power, guaranteeing personal liberty and some sort of economic liberty.

Belfast · 24-05-2009 9:14pm

Denerick wrote: »

My apologies. Thought you were a socialist actually!

Socialism is not my thing.

I am some where between minimalist government Libertarian and free market anarchist.
not very main stream I admit.

Denerick wrote: »

I actually agree with you; there does need to be more checks and balances than there currently are. But for the present moment they have served us OK. Ireland is one of the few electoral democracies in the world that emerged from the ashes of WWI that has stood all that time in a continuous and unbroken state. Thats quite an achievement - it puts us in the same political culture as the USA and the UK.

You are right that we have a had a pretty stable political system since independence, no Cout de tas here.

Irish people do not go in for extreme politics or rapid changes in policy.
Extreme politics of any kind do have a very small following. In some way that is a good thing.

Not sure the main stream political culture of USA and the UK in recent year is anything to admire.

Denerick wrote: »

And its not that I think we should be apathetic persé. I'm saying that getting hot and bothered about the particulars of party politics is absurd.

true

Denerick wrote: »

As long as the base remains secure then we're Ok.

not sure what that means.

Denerick wrote: »

And if anything liberty has increased in Ireland over the 20 years. Dramatically so in fact. Personal liberty has increased exponentially. As has economic liberty. If we're talking about the UK you may have a point but certainly not Ireland.

personnel liberty has increased in the in that the emergency powers the state was run under during the troubles are gone now.

Economic liberty in some ways as it is easier to move money in and out of the country and buying for investment is no legal.

Against that having money in the from of cash in any thing other that small amounts is consider to be almost a crime and not having a bank that can be monitored by the state again is viewed as an indication of criminal activity.

Criminal assets Bureau has decreased our liberty in that it can confiscate peoples assets even if they have not be convicted of a crime.

There is surveillance and phone tapping than before.

Denerick wrote: »

And we disagree over the fundamentals of government. I see it primarily as a big public service - sort of like a management agency that ties all the complex services we need to have a tolerable standard of living. I'm guessing you desire greater privatisation. But I consider that to be a peripheral difference in the essentials of limiting power, guaranteeing personal liberty and some sort of economic liberty.

You are correct I do have a different view of the functions of government.
Not sure I like how privatisation has been done it seem it changed state monopolies in to private ones.( not much improvement)

as you say personal liberty is very important as is economic liberty.

lmtduffy · 25-05-2009 3:03am

Belfast wrote: »

who else's opinion would I be giving ?

Maybe I could have been clearer here, I mean its your opinion that these policies are incompetent so it is not correct to call the system unfair because you disagree with the opinions of others.

Who said I am angry.

Now you are speaking for the majority of the people in Ireland ?

I made the assumption a perceived unfairness might rub you the wrong way.

Im not speaking for the majority in Ireland im referring to the lack of a libertarian/anarchist party in existence in this state.

What else would a labour supporter do?

I do not understand that last point. Do you think I am try to purswade people that my ideas are wrong?

I am suggesting that instead of claiming the system is unfair it would be more constructive for you to convince others of your ideology.

Dont see how I suggested you tell people why your ideology is wrong.

Permabear · 25-05-2009 5:24am

This post has been deleted.

Belfast · 25-05-2009 1:02pm

lmtduffy wrote: »

Maybe I could have been clearer here, I mean its your opinion that these policies are incompetent so it is not correct to call the system unfair because you disagree with the opinions of others.

I never said the system was unfair. I think people having different political opinions in normal and a good thing.

lmtduffy wrote: »

I made the assumption a perceived unfairness might rub you the wrong way.

Im not speaking for the majority in Ireland im referring to the lack of a libertarian/anarchist party in existence in this state.

Parties in Ireland are personality driven rather than ideology.

lmtduffy wrote: »

I am suggesting that instead of claiming the system is unfair it would be more constructive for you to convince others of your ideology.

Dont see how I suggested you tell people why your ideology is wrong.

Again I never said the system was unfair.

The reason I do not promote any ideology in this thread is it would be off topic as the question.

Denerick wrote: »

Does electoral democracy ultimately always degenerate into a vain and irrelevant ego match between two groups who fundamentally have the same ideology?

lmtduffy · 25-05-2009 6:43pm

Belfast wrote: »

I never said the system was unfair. I think people having different political opinions in normal and a good thing.

Parties in Ireland are personality driven rather than ideology.

Again I never said the system was unfair.

The reason I do not promote any ideology in this thread is it would be off topic as the question.

I was assuming your distaste for the way things are was due to unfairness as in when you say " it deprives the people of a real choice".

And your agreement(via thanks) with turgons post "There is everything wrong with that. How can we claim to be so democratic when, given that each of the 3 options are the same, we really dont have a choice?

I disagree that parties are not driven by ideology, I think they do have ideologies but the clarity of the ideologies is skewed due to the civil war.

I wanst suggesting you talk about your ideology here I was suggesting hat instead of giving out about the lack of a libertarian party you garner the support that could be there and set one up in order to give the "deprived people there choice"

Denerick · 25-05-2009 6:45pm

lmtduffy wrote: »

I was assuming your distaste for the way things are was due to unfairness as in when you say " it deprives the people of a real choice".

And your agreement(via thanks) with turgons post "There is everything wrong with that. How can we claim to be so democratic when, given that each of the 3 options are the same, we really dont have a choice?

I disagree that parties are not driven by ideology, I think they do have ideologies but the clarity of the ideologies is skewed due to the civil war.

I wanst suggesting you talk about your ideology here I was suggesting hat instead of giving out about the lack of a libertarian party you garner the support that could be there and set one up in order to give the "deprived people there choice"

What are you moaning about? He's entitled to give his opinion without having to constantly qualify it.

lmtduffy · 25-05-2009 7:26pm

Denerick wrote: »

What are you moaning about? He's entitled to give his opinion without having to constantly qualify it.

Ive written what Im "moaning" about in my post care to respond to that?

Do you know how a discussion forum works?

And if he cant qualify it(which Im sure he can) he should reconsider it.

Belfast · 25-05-2009 9:40pm

lmtduffy wrote: »

I was assuming your distaste for the way things are was due to unfairness as in when you say " it deprives the people of a real choice".

And your agreement(via thanks) with turgons post "There is everything wrong with that. How can we claim to be so democratic when, given that each of the 3 options are the same, we really dont have a choice?

I disagree that parties are not driven by ideology, I think they do have ideologies but the clarity of the ideologies is skewed due to the civil war.

I wanst suggesting you talk about your ideology here I was suggesting hat instead of giving out about the lack of a libertarian party you garner the support that could be there and set one up in order to give the "deprived people there choice"

I did not complain about the lack of a Libertarian party. This not what this thread is about.
My complaint is about the lack of diversity of thought, opinions and ideas in the Dáil including non-libertarian ones.

if the main parties in the Dáil were all Libertarian and the only debate was about personalties this too would not be good.

lmtduffy · 25-05-2009 10:01pm

Belfast wrote: »

I did not complain about the lack of a Libertarian party. This not what this thread is about.
My complaint is about the lack of diversity of thought, opinions and ideas in the Dáil including non-libertarian ones.

if the main parties in the Dáil were all Libertarian and the only debate was about personalties this too would not be good.

so would you prefer an affirmative action system?

I dont agree its a bad thing that the majority of people in the Dail reflect the attitude of the majority of those outside it.

I dont see who is being deprived of choice?

Belfast · 25-05-2009 10:20pm

lmtduffy wrote: »

so would you prefer an affirmative action system?

I dont agree its a bad thing that the majority of people in the Dail reflect the attitude of the majority of those outside it.

I dont see who is being deprived of choice?

affirmative action system. Not quite sure what you mean by affirmative action system in an Irish political context.

I am not sure that the majority in the Dáil reflect the attitude of the people outside it.

The elector register is years out of date and open to manipulation.

The Labour party to their credit asked that the elector register be update at the time of the census by asking the census collectors to do both jobs at the same time. FG and FF rejected this idea.

Also other political opinions or ideas tend not to to be discussed in the mainstream media so most people are not aware of them.

lmtduffy · 25-05-2009 10:46pm

Belfast wrote: »

affirmative action system. Not quite sure what you mean by affirmative action system in an Irish political context.

I am not sure that the majority in the Dáil reflect the attitude of the people outside it.

The elector register is years out of date and open to manipulation.

The Labour party to their credit asked that the elector register be update at the time of the census by asking the census collectors to do both jobs at the same time. FG and FF rejected this idea.

Also other political opinions or ideas tend not to to be discussed in the mainstream media so most people are not aware of them.

I mean having a quota for representation of certain ideologies, I dont think its workable really, but just thought Id put it out there...

Whatever is on the register would you agree its votes that count? and each persons own initiative to register them selves to vote?

(I think I may be missing how you mean the register can be manipulated could you elaborate please?)

The media argument doesn't quiet float you get every fringe political movement claiming that, isnt it the responsibility of the movement to garner media attention? or do you feel the media is biased in Ireland, if so why?

Belfast · 26-05-2009 12:30am

lmtduffy wrote: »

I mean having a quota for representation of certain ideologies, I dont think its workable really, but just thought Id put it out there...

As you not a good idea.

lmtduffy wrote: »

Whatever is on the register would you agree its votes that count? and each persons own initiative to register them selves to vote?

The elector register is suppose to represent the people who are eligible to vote. It does not. I neighbour of mine who has been dead for several years on on the elector register.
if the elector register is not accurate does an election reflect the will of the people.

lmtduffy wrote: »

(I think I may be missing how you mean the register can be manipulated could you elaborate please?)

activist for political parties have been removing and adding people to the elector register for many years.

lmtduffy wrote: »

The media argument doesn't quiet float you get every fringe political movement claiming that, isnt it the responsibility of the movement to garner media attention? or do you feel the media is biased in Ireland, if so why?

Because they only talk about the ideas of the parties already in the Dail.

When they talk about he economy they only discuss it for the point of view of one school of ecnomic with mention there are others.

Is the media bias? Depend on what you mean by Bias. The media suffer from the same lack of ideas that is present in Irish politics.

lmtduffy · 26-05-2009 1:43pm

Belfast wrote: »

The elector register is suppose to represent the people who are eligible to vote. It does not. I neighbour of mine who has been dead for several years on on the elector register.
if the elector register is not accurate does an election reflect the will of the people.

activist for political parties have been removing and adding people to the elector register for many years.

I still dont see how people being registered to vote can be sued to anyone's advantage.

Because they only talk about the ideas of the parties already in the Dail.

When they talk about he economy they only discuss it for the point of view of one school of ecnomic with mention there are others.

Is the media bias? Depend on what you mean by Bias. The media suffer from the same lack of ideas that is present in Irish politics.

They talk abut the polices of their own parties because thats what they were voted in for, people choose them because they agree with those polices.

I dont think youll find anyone really looks at things form only one school of economic thought, thats a recipe for trouble. I think youll find the reason things appear populist to you is because modern politics is not as straightforward as it used to be or as political philosophy or the classical separation of ideologies would have you believe.

What we have now are more hybrid parties, and the reason for this is that the original ideologies dont work or arent suitable today, if you believe there is a convergence cant you agree that it is because people see the issues converging as being best dealt with in a certain way.

Belfast · 26-05-2009 11:32pm

lmtduffy wrote: »

I still dont see how people being registered to vote can be sued to anyone's advantage.

people are removed for the elector register who are known not to vote for the party of the people that removed. Them people who are lightly to vote for a party are added to the elector register. In some cases multiple times

lmtduffy wrote: »

They talk abut the polices of their own parties because thats what they were voted in for,

Who are they ? the media or political parties ?

lmtduffy wrote: »

people choose them because they agree with those polices.

If people have never heard any other point of view, they could hardly be giving informed consent.

lmtduffy wrote: »

I dont think youll find anyone really looks at things form only one school of economic thought, thats a recipe for trouble.

That is what happen now. Keynesian school of economics is the only school used by the political parties or the media.

lmtduffy wrote: »

I think youll find the reason things appear populist to you is because modern politics is not as straightforward as it used to be or as political philosophy or the classical separation of ideologies would have you believe.

From what I can tell Irish political have always been like this. I do not remember a classical separation of ideologies.

lmtduffy wrote: »

What we have now are more hybrid parties,

it more all things to all men parties rather than hybrid parties.

and the reason for this is that the original ideologies dont work or arent suitable today,[/QUOTE]

I do not think it is because some ideologies have failed the main Irish parties were never interested in them in the first place.

lmtduffy wrote: »

if you believe there is a convergence cant you agree that it is because people see the issues converging as being best dealt with in a certain way.

This would be a good point if there was a reason discussion in the media an else where on the merits of different approach to the issues many points of view.

It practice people are present with one point of view.

lmtduffy · 27-05-2009 4:04pm

Belfast wrote: »

people are removed for the elector register who are known not to vote for the party of the people that removed. Them people who are lightly to vote for a party are added to the elector register. In some cases multiple times

So who is rigging the election?

Who are they ? the media or political parties ?

the parties

If people have never heard any other point of view, they could hardly be giving informed consent.

They are not being denied the point of view, and the reason they arent many people flouting certain points of view is mainly because they are redundant.

They are not as you said being deprived of anything.

That is what happen now. Keynesian school of economics is the only school used by the political parties or the media.

to different ends and for different means I might add, and the reason most people use it, and the reason it is the main system almost all over the world is because it is the most practical and can be used to the greater benefit.

what alternative would you like to see?

From what I can tell Irish political have always been like this. I do not remember a classical separation of ideologies.

This can be drawn back to the civil war, still people choose to keep the parties dynamics this way, no one is being deprived.

it more all things to all men parties rather than hybrid parties.

good help a party that acts beyond classical definitions, you do get that those definitions are used to identify parties for academic or journalism purposes, they are not rules for how a party should act, and a party trying to make as much of the electorate happy is noting to be sneered at as long as they do so responsibly.

I do not think it is because some ideologies have failed the main Irish parties were never interested in them in the first place.

Yes because you had lads going to Spain fighting on two sides for what, once again your fetish for having political parties act according to classical definitions is setting your self up for let down, get over it.

This would be a good point if there was a reason discussion in the media an else where on the merits of different approach to the issues many points of view.

It practice people are present with one point of view.

the reason you dont see these points of view is because almost know one is realistically advocating them,

Belfast · 28-05-2009 11:40pm

lmtduffy wrote: »

So who is rigging the election?

I never said that the election was rigged. I said that the elector register is open to political parties or others adding or remove people for it.
if the elector register does not accurately reflect the electorate, then how valid is the result of an election based on an unreliable elector register.

This question was asked in Northern Ireland many years ago. They now have an accurate and up-to-date elector register and a system to keep it up to date and accurate.

lmtduffy wrote: »

They are not being denied the point of view, and the reason they arent many people flouting certain points of view is mainly because they are redundant.

They are not as you said being deprived of anything.

I did say any one was being denied a point of view or deprived of a point of view. I said they never heard other point of view in the main stream media.
Who decides what ideas are redundant?

lmtduffy wrote: »

to different ends and for different means I might add, and the reason most people use it, and the reason it is the main system almost all over the world is because it is the most practical and can be used to the greater benefit.

I do not think it is chosen because it is the best or most practical. I think it is chosen because people have not heard what the alternative is.

lmtduffy wrote: »

what alternative would you like to see?

I would like people to hear that are a number of different schools of economics for example not just one. The same should apply to other issues. if the other ones are as useless as you say them people will not choose them, but at least they will be able to make an informed choice.

lmtduffy wrote: »

This can be drawn back to the civil war, still people choose to keep the parties dynamics this way, no one is being deprived.

Again I did not say people are being deprived.

lmtduffy wrote: »

good help a party that acts beyond classical definitions, you do get that those definitions are used to identify parties for academic or journalism purposes, they are not rules for how a party should act, and a party trying to make as much of the electorate happy is noting to be sneered at as long as they do so responsibly.

I have no objection to a party with mixed policies. The problem is all the main political parties follow more or less the same policies. Variations on a theme. I did not sneer at any political party.
any party trying to make as much of the electorate happy normal normally has only a short term effect.

lmtduffy wrote: »

Yes because you had lads going to Spain fighting on two sides for what, once again your fetish for having political parties act according to classical definitions is setting your self up for let down, get over it.

I do not send any one to Spain. Fight on both side of wars is an old and Irish tradition that has nothing to do with political parties.
I did not say any thing about classical definitions of political parties.
I said we need more ideas and diversity, whether that is in a single party or more that one party or from independents does not concern me.

lmtduffy wrote: »

the reason you dont see these points of view is because almost know one is realistically advocating them,

No one in Ireland is running for election on any ideas other than those already in the Dail because on one has heard of any other in the main stream media.

The original question was.

Does electoral democracy ultimately always degenerate into a vain and irrelevant ego match between two groups who fundamentally have the same ideology?

Yes. Democracy will ultimately tend to degenerate into a vain and irrelevant ego match between two groups who fundamentally have the same ideology.

Is this a good thing ?

I do not thing so, even if I agreed with the ideology or lack of it that such a system produced.

lmtduffy · 30-05-2009 4:17am

Belfast wrote: »

I never said that the election was rigged. I said that the elector register is open to political parties or others adding or remove people for it.
if the elector register does not accurately reflect the electorate, then how valid is the result of an election based on an unreliable elector register.

This question was asked in Northern Ireland many years ago. They now have an accurate and up-to-date elector register and a system to keep it up to date and accurate.

okay the electoral register might not be up to date, this helps who in what way?

I did say any one was being denied a point of view or deprived of a point of view. I said they never heard other point of view in the main stream media.
Who decides what ideas are redundant?

Belfast wrote: »

Yes because it deprives the people of a real choice and is a sign of a failed political system.

Know one is using the idea, it is redundant.

I do not think it is chosen because it is the best or most practical. I think it is chosen because people have not heard what the alternative is.

Which alternative?

I would like people to hear that are a number of different schools of economics for example not just one. The same should apply to other issues. if the other ones are as useless as you say them people will not choose them, but at least they will be able to make an informed choice.

No one is hiding anything, do you think it is a duty of the government to teach everyone whether they care or not about the different schools of economics?

Again I did not say people are being deprived.

Belfast wrote: »

Yes because it deprives the people of a real choice and is a sign of a failed political system.

I have no objection to a party with mixed policies. The problem is all the main political parties follow more or less the same policies. Variations on a theme. I did not sneer at any political party.
any party trying to make as much of the electorate happy normal normally has only a short term effect.

They follow the same policies because they are more or less what people want.
Hence they are all elected on those policies and those offering alternatives are not elected.

There is also a difference between populism and the detriments that can have and the majority of the parties similar school of economic thought.

I do not send any one to Spain. Fight on both side of wars is an old and Irish tradition that has nothing to do with political parties.

who was the civil war in Spain fought by, and what was it that lead to Irish fighting on different sides?

I did not say any thing about classical definitions of political parties.
I said we need more ideas and diversity, whether that is in a single party or more that one party or from independents does not concern me.

No one in Ireland is running for election on any ideas other than those already in the Dail because on one has heard of any other in the main stream media.

No one is stopping people from learning about other ideologies and no one is stopping anyone from bringing other ideologies into the media, you have noting to complain about other than your disagreement with the choices the Irish people have made through out the history of the state.

The original question was.

Does electoral democracy ultimately always degenerate into a vain and irrelevant ego match between two groups who fundamentally have the same ideology?

Yes. Democracy will ultimately tend to degenerate into a vain and irrelevant ego match between two groups who fundamentally have the same ideology.

Is this a good thing ?

I do not thing so, even if I agreed with the ideology or lack of it that such a system produced.

And your basing this assumption completely on what has happened in Ireland's short history, whilst completely ignoring the civil war that skewed Irish politics to this day?

Belfast · 23-06-2009 11:04pm

"Seven voters in 'empty' house beat deadline to get on register
By Michael Brennan Political Correspondent
Tuesday June 23 2009

FEARS of electoral fraud will be raised in the Dail today after it emerged that seven immigrants were registered to vote at an empty house which had not been lived in for almost three years.

The suspect voters were added to the voting list in Monaghan just days before the deadline for registration expired, an Irish Independent investigation has found.

The voters were registered to a two-bedroomed house in the town of Ballybay.

The man responsible for looking after the house last night confirmed that nobody has lived there for almost three years -- and that the owner is currently in the USA.

Neither of them were aware the house was listed as the address for seven immigrant voters who were added late to the electoral register.

The issue is due to be raised in the Dail today by Fine Gael Cavan-Monaghan TD Seymour Crawford.

The revelation will increase the pressure on Environment Minister John Gormley to look again at the concept of using PPS numbers to ensure the electoral register is accurate.

Mr Crawford said it raised major questions about the operation of the electoral system.

"If suddenly we find there are more people in houses than there is in a normal day and large numbers are being added just weeks before an election, I think the whole electoral system has to be looked at," he told the Irish Independent.

He said he understood the majority of the seven voters registered to the house at 2 Church Street, Ballybay, had voted in the local elections.

Monaghan County Council spokeswoman Carmel Thornton said the council had been unable to check the hundreds of names that were added late to the supplementary register.

"We had about 500 applications received in the last half day of the closing date. It was impossible to check those because the county registrar was waiting to publish the supplementary register," she said.

Monaghan County Council had earlier struck around a dozen immigrant voters off its preliminary electoral register after a fieldworker found they were not living at the address they had supplied.

Resources

It carried out the checks in Carrickmacross and Clones, but not in Ballybay due to a lack of resources.

Many of the forms requiring late registrations were supplied to the local authority by politicians, a practice which is common across the country.

Ms Thornton said all of the voters who were added to the list had provided signed forms, stamped by gardai.

"The only people who were put on the supplement were people who had completed the form which had been signed by a garda and stamped in a garda station. We would have taken it that they would have proved their identities to gardai," she said.

But this raises the question as to how seven immigrant voters got onto the county's supplementary register by giving an address for a house they did not live in.

The keyholder of the house, Noel Saunderson, showed the Irish Independent that the house in Ballybay was empty.

A spokesman for Mr Gormley expressed concern but said that the matter could only be investigated if there was a complaint to gardai or to the local electoral returning officer. "
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/seven-voters-in-empty-house-beat-deadline-to-get-on-register-1784865.html

This not good for Democracy.

lmtduffy · 23-06-2009 11:38pm

Belfast wrote: »

"Seven voters in 'empty' house beat deadline to get on register
By Michael Brennan Political Correspondent
Tuesday June 23 2009

FEARS of electoral fraud will be raised in the Dail today after it emerged that seven immigrants were registered to vote at an empty house which had not been lived in for almost three years.

The suspect voters were added to the voting list in Monaghan just days before the deadline for registration expired, an Irish Independent investigation has found.

The voters were registered to a two-bedroomed house in the town of Ballybay.

The man responsible for looking after the house last night confirmed that nobody has lived there for almost three years -- and that the owner is currently in the USA.

Neither of them were aware the house was listed as the address for seven immigrant voters who were added late to the electoral register.

The issue is due to be raised in the Dail today by Fine Gael Cavan-Monaghan TD Seymour Crawford.

The revelation will increase the pressure on Environment Minister John Gormley to look again at the concept of using PPS numbers to ensure the electoral register is accurate.

Mr Crawford said it raised major questions about the operation of the electoral system.

"If suddenly we find there are more people in houses than there is in a normal day and large numbers are being added just weeks before an election, I think the whole electoral system has to be looked at," he told the Irish Independent.

He said he understood the majority of the seven voters registered to the house at 2 Church Street, Ballybay, had voted in the local elections.

Monaghan County Council spokeswoman Carmel Thornton said the council had been unable to check the hundreds of names that were added late to the supplementary register.

"We had about 500 applications received in the last half day of the closing date. It was impossible to check those because the county registrar was waiting to publish the supplementary register," she said.

Monaghan County Council had earlier struck around a dozen immigrant voters off its preliminary electoral register after a fieldworker found they were not living at the address they had supplied.

Resources

It carried out the checks in Carrickmacross and Clones, but not in Ballybay due to a lack of resources.

Many of the forms requiring late registrations were supplied to the local authority by politicians, a practice which is common across the country.

Ms Thornton said all of the voters who were added to the list had provided signed forms, stamped by gardai.

"The only people who were put on the supplement were people who had completed the form which had been signed by a garda and stamped in a garda station. We would have taken it that they would have proved their identities to gardai," she said.

But this raises the question as to how seven immigrant voters got onto the county's supplementary register by giving an address for a house they did not live in.

The keyholder of the house, Noel Saunderson, showed the Irish Independent that the house in Ballybay was empty.

A spokesman for Mr Gormley expressed concern but said that the matter could only be investigated if there was a complaint to gardai or to the local electoral returning officer. "
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/seven-voters-in-empty-house-beat-deadline-to-get-on-register-1784865.html

This not good for Democracy.

very fixable and not very relevant to the topic at hand.

Politics and Degeneration

Comments