How did Fianna Fail become the largest party?

kraggy

After the Civil War, De Valera's side were smaller than the Free State side.

Fianna Fail was formed in 1926, but how did De Valera turn it into the largest party by 1932 if more people were in favour of the Treaty than not in favour of it?

Thanks,

K.

Dr. Baltar

There are a number of theories.
Most being along the lines of a patriotic Ireland seeing De Valera as the last signee of the Proclamation to be left alive.

Another theory being the addition of the blueshirts ect. to Fine Gael caused many to drift apart from said party.

Then of course there is the great surprise felt by the Irish people when Fianna Fáil won an election for the first time without any bloodshed.

Scofflaw

Equally, you could claim the inveterate hypocrisy of humanity - people were in favour of the Treaty because it produced peace, but despised those who had helped them sell themselves out for the sake of peace once there was no risk of going back to war.

One could then say that that set the tone for Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael - with the former colluding with that hypocrisy, and the latter believing that people should stand by what they voted for.

To be honest, though, that's utter rubbish. You're probably better off with Wikipedia.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Rosahane

Or, you could be realistic and understand that it quickly became evident that membership of FF was an inside track to jobs, grants and favours.

Very few people joined FF to further the cause of anyone but themselves!

Still the same:mad:

aDeener

Rosahane wrote: »

Or, you could be realistic and understand that it quickly became evident that membership of FF was an inside track to jobs, grants and favours.

Very few people joined FF to further the cause of anyone but themselves!

Still the same:mad:

ffs, thats ridiculous to suggest that was the case back them. dont sully them because of the actions of the current crop.

in rural areas, FF was the party for small farmers and FG for the big ones

OhNoYouDidn't

aDeener wrote: »

ffs, thats ridiculous to suggest that was the case back them. dont sully them because of the actions of the current crop.

in rural areas, FF was the party for small farmers and FG for the big ones

FF have always worked on clientilist lines and there were corruption scandals as far back as Dev.

aDeener

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

FF have always worked on clientilist lines and there were corruption scandals as far back as Dev.

such as?

and even if that were the case, i said not to sully them all. there were not all corrupt as people here like to claim

Dannyboy83

aDeener wrote: »

such as?

The Irish Press?

wicklowwonder

Fianna Fail have always been the best organised party at grass roots level. Dev and his fellow high ranking officers got Fianna Fail mobilised in every village in Ireland! They ensured to get things done its simple and it worked and it still does, well at least to the next election we will see then.......

Exile 1798

It’s an interesting question.

My opinion is that people were quite Nationalist. They wanted unity pursued and they wanted the Free State to move towards a Republic. Once Fianna Fáil dropped the armed struggle and abstention, the electorate had a Party that unlike the Treatyites would be aggressive on the National question, but would avoid open confrontation and war.

A similar thing happened in the North with Sinn Féin and the SDLP. As soon as Northern Nationalists had a choice between two pro-peace Parties, they broke towards the one they knew would push the Nationalist agenda harder.

scr123

I am 100% FF but would never ever engage in attacking C Na G and never ever engage in Civil War politics. What I would do is attack the type of people who came together to form Fine Gael. I would also attack Labour for its failure since its foundation to fight for the working class. FF captured the imagination of those who neither were right wing nor left wing and who have proven themselves to be pragmatic and populist. FF get things done and that is why the floating vote of this country has so often returned FF to power and just might do so in 2012

loldog

FF for the farmers. The farmers dole, the repudiation of land annuities, that sort of thing.

.

Liam Byrne

scr123 wrote: »

FF get things done and that is why the floating vote of this country has so often returned FF to power and just might do so in 2012

They get things done alright, but not what we need done.

paddyland

Fianna Fáil, the party who are neither right wing nor left wing, who can pretend to be all things to all men, while actually only being about their private boy's club. Pity the generations of fools who believed any old sh1te perpetrated by FF, look where we are now. It had to blow up some day, they got too greedy.

FF thrive on fools, but this economic disaster might educate a lot of people (other than the blind diehards who will believe anything) and there might be a lot less people to fool next time around.

illuminati

Fianna Fail have failed the country. Their cronyism and fear of losing supporters has dug us into such a deep hole that it will probably take us years to climb out. Any good things the party has done in the past to build the country have been undone by Bertie and his lackeys. I mean they built a f**king metal spike on O'Connell St while the Gardaí are still ill-equipped, and have been for decades, not to mention all the other underfunded, ill-equipped departments :mad: Sure, people say that it's down to poor distribution of funds but FF are supposed to be in charge. It's their job to tell the department heads to get their act together.

trapsagenius

kraggy wrote: »

After the Civil War, De Valera's side were smaller than the Free State side.

Fianna Fail was formed in 1926, but how did De Valera turn it into the largest party by 1932 if more people were in favour of the Treaty than not in favour of it?

Thanks,

K.

I would say the reasons FF came to power in 1932 are these:

1.The Cumann na nGaedhal government was unpopular with many people, especially in the civil service after cutting gardai and teachers wages (oh, if they could see us now!).They also cut OAPs which was unpopular, although I think that was some time before the election, 1923 or 1924 I think.

2.Dev followed a decidedly populist line in opposition, as practically every FF leader has done since, unfortunately.This obviously strikes a chord with voters.

3.People were more in favour of a Republic than a Free state-and FF were the self styled Republican party.People approved the Treaty as an alternative to going back to war in 1922, but most people agreed with Collins and saw it as a temporary thing, a stepping stone to greater independence.Voters felt that Cumann na nGaedhal hadn't done enough to push for greater independence(although they were wrong on this because Cumann na nGaedhal certainly did their bit).

4.The Boundary Commission debacle was fairly damaging to government credibility, as was Cumann na nGaedhals unwillingness or inability to get to grips with the amount of people emigrating from Ireland during the 1920s.As would Cumann na nGaedhals agreement to pay annuities to the British despite the Ultimate Financial Settlement not being approved in the Dail.This pissed off farmers.

5. Many people in Ireland felt that Dev was practically a demigod, which certainly influenced them.

6.Also, like Wicklow Wonder said, they were well organised at grass roots.

Dr. Baltar wrote: »

There are a number of theories.
Most being along the lines of a patriotic Ireland seeing De Valera as the last signee of the Proclamation to be left alive.

Another theory being the addition of the blueshirts ect. to Fine Gael caused many to drift apart from said party.

.

Err...what?Dev never signed the proclamation.And Fine Gael were not created until 1933.You seem to have no idea what you are talking about.

Denerick

Trapsagenius, great post.

Cumann na nGaedhal were very unpopular because they were inherently conservative and supported the large farmer interest in this country. People tend to forget that the great division in Irish society between 1880-1950 was not between the remainder of the Landlord system (Which in any case died out in 1900s) but between the graziers (Farmers with 50+ acres) and the small farmers, who made up most of the rural population. FF stood for their interests, and hence had a wide grassroots support, which lasted longer than the Civil War era. Then, and even to a degree now, FG are the party of the big farmers and their interests.

I would even say that the Civil War politics is over stated, though it became very important to a significant part of the country (FF families and FG families etc.) Ireland largely had the social class party political breakdown that we've always insisted we didn't! It mightn't have assumed a left-right division, but it was as close as you can get in a conservative rural country!

walrusgumble

wicklowwonder wrote: »

Fianna Fail have always been the best organised party at grass roots level. Dev and his fellow high ranking officers got Fianna Fail mobilised in every village in Ireland! They ensured to get things done its simple and it worked and it still does, well at least to the next election we will see then.......

spot on! Sean Lemass was the great organiser. One might wonder if Haughey learnt from him when Haughey was out in the cold in the early 1970's (ie chicken and dinner trips around the country when he was only a back bencher)

The Irish Press helped.

Rosahane

trapsagenius wrote: »

I would say the reasons FF came to power in 1932 are these:

1.The Cumann na nGaedhal government was unpopular with many people, especially in the civil service after cutting gardai and teachers wages (oh, if they could see us now!).They also cut OAPs which was unpopular, although I think that was some time before the election, 1923 or 1924 I think.

2.Dev followed a decidedly populist line in opposition, as practically every FF leader has done since, unfortunately.This obviously strikes a chord with voters.

3.People were more in favour of a Republic than a Free state-and FF were the self styled Republican party.People approved the Treaty as an alternative to going back to war in 1922, but most people agreed with Collins and saw it as a temporary thing, a stepping stone to greater independence.Voters felt that Cumann na nGaedhal hadn't done enough to push for greater independence(although they were wrong on this because Cumann na nGaedhal certainly did their bit).

4.The Boundary Commission debacle was fairly damaging to government credibility, as was Cumann na nGaedhals unwillingness or inability to get to grips with the amount of people emigrating from Ireland during the 1920s.As would Cumann na nGaedhals agreement to pay annuities to the British despite the Ultimate Financial Settlement not being approved in the Dail.This pissed off farmers.

5. Many people in Ireland felt that Dev was practically a demigod, which certainly influenced them.

6.Also, like Wicklow Wonder said, they were well organised at grass roots.



Err...what?Dev never signed the proclamation.And Fine Gael were not created until 1933.You seem to have no idea what you are talking about.

Well said, with the exception of point 5 you are spot on. I think Dev's demigod status was subsequent to 1932 and was carefully crafted and created by the manipulation of public opinion, history and education by subsequent FF governments.

loldog

Rosahane wrote: »

Well said, with the exception of point 5 you are spot on. I think Dev's demigod status was subsequent to 1932 and was carefully crafted and created by the manipulation of public opinion, history and education by subsequent FF governments.

Oh indeed, they used to call him the "Spanish Ass" where I come from.

.

baalthor

I guess FF always had better marketing than the other parties:D

For example, the party has (or had?) 3 goals:

1. Re-unification of Ireland

2. Re-establishment of the Irish language as the main language of the country

3. Maintaining the maximum number of families on the land (as farmers)

For the largely agrarian and nationalistic population of the new state these goals probably sounded wonderful even if they were all practically unattainable. If any of the other parties had similarly clearly articulated goals, then I haven't heard about them ...

FF also succeeded as portraying themselves as quasi anti-establishment i.e. representing the "ordinary dacent Irish person" while at the same time being the establishment.

The other Republican party in the US has achieved this as well in recent years. George W Bush who must qualify as part of the "elite" under any reasonable definition of the term is seen as an ordinary guy by many voters in contrast to the "liberal elite" from the Democratic party.

Indeed, you could make a similar observation about DeValera: the half Irish, rugby playing, Blackrock College educated resident of South County Dublin was a hero to vast numbers of "racy of the soil", rural dwelling, primary school educated GAA players!

Haughey pulled off this trick as well while I can't think of any FG leader who was perceived as anything other than what they were.
It seems to be more of a FF thing. Mary Hanafin was appalled when FF were referred to as part of the political elite: "I'm not part of the elite! We're no different than the people who vote for us"
In her interview the other morning she described how she and her father had breakfast with the Pope! Surely Mary doesn't believe that the average voter gets the opportunity to dine out with His Holiness!

And finally, the following (which I read somewhere) is supposed to give an insight into the mindset of some FF voters:

Interviewer: "And have your family always voted for FF?"
Old man: "We have, we've been supporters since the Rising"
Interviewer: "Since 1916 ??"
Old man: "No .. since 1798"

trapsagenius

Rosahane wrote: »

Well said, with the exception of point 5 you are spot on. I think Dev's demigod status was subsequent to 1932 and was carefully crafted and created by the manipulation of public opinion, history and education by subsequent FF governments.

Hmmm possibly but many people in Ireland always looked up to Dev-even prior to 1932-intellectual image, embodiment of nationalist Ireland etc, etc.For better or for worse people believed in this and found Dev an attractive leader.

rightwingdub

FF are a partitionist who have always absolutely f**k all for the Nationalist population in the North, unfortunately there are plenty of gullible people who actually think FF are a Republican party, when in reality their best electoral interests lie in ensuring that partition reamins in Ireland.
Why are FF still the largest party?

1) A certain public tolerance of corruption exists and FF are a cultural symbol of this public tolerance of corruption that exists in Ireland.

2) Always populist in opposition from Dev through to Bertie Ahern, FF always put their own selfish interests first instead of the interests of the country. I could never see FF supporting a FG minority government for instance in the same Alan Dukes supportedHaughey in 1987. Braindead populism will always prevail in FF.

3) Gombeen parish pump politics need I say any more, jobs for the boys.

kraggy

OP here.

So much brilliant information there lads. Thanks a million. Makes things much clearer now.

Kinda knew it would fall into anti-FF jibes for a while but thankfully it's back on track now.

Thanks a million for all the information.

K.

Apogee

baalthor wrote: »

I guess FF always had better marketing than the other parties:D

For example, the party has (or had?) 3 goals:

1. Re-unification of Ireland

As did Cumann na nGaedheal - via the Boundary Commission.

2. Re-establishment of the Irish language as the main language of the country

Also true of Cumann na nGaedheal.

3. Maintaining the maximum number of families on the land (as farmers)

The policies of FF were certainly left of CnaG - with particular appeal to small farmers - and that appears to have been a major draw.

FF also succeeded as portraying themselves as quasi anti-establishment i.e. representing the "ordinary dacent Irish person" while at the same time being the establishment.

When the party was established, they were outside of the establishment. They were denounced as 'communists' from the pulpits and CnaG portrayed them as little more than anarchists who threatened the foundations of the state. De Valera's subsequent attempts to keep on the right side of Archbishop McQuaid were as much to do with political expediency as any religious conviction.

The other Republican party in the US has achieved this as well in recent years.

If anything, the FF party and its policies of the 20s and 30s were closer to the Obama rhetoric of "Yes, we can". CnaG were the fiscal conservatives.

Laminations

scr123 wrote: »

I am 100% FF but would never ever engage in attacking C Na G and never ever engage in Civil War politics.

What? You are a diehard blindly loyal FFer. You ARE civil war politics

Exile 1798

rightwingdub wrote: »

FF are a partitionist who have always absolutely f**k all for the Nationalist population in the North, unfortunately there are plenty of gullible people who actually think FF are a Republican party, when in reality their best electoral interests lie in ensuring that partition reamins in Ireland.
Why are FF still the largest party?

Unfortunately, there are plenty of gullible people who can't understand the difference between a parties history and their present.

Mahatma coat

there is only one Question in Irish Politics

' are ya a Fianna Fail Man or What?? '

and there is only one acceptable answer where I come from



Fianna Fail are the biggest party in the country because their particular btrand of corrupt cronyism is something that the majority of the population identify with, there may be people here on boards who railed against FF druring the boom years, but the majority of the population endorsed their schemin as it proved to be useful for them, FF Control Grassroots politics in Rural Ireland, I would not be surprised in the slightest if all we see after the next election is a reshuffle of the cabinet.

Historicaly FF have been the party that Drove things Forward

baalthor

Apogee wrote: »

As did Cumann na nGaedheal - via the Boundary Commission.



Also true of Cumann na nGaedheal.



The policies of FF were certainly left of CnaG - with particular appeal to small farmers - and that appears to have been a major draw.



When the party was established, they were outside of the establishment. They were denounced as 'communists' from the pulpits and CnaG portrayed them as little more than anarchists who threatened the foundations of the state. De Valera's subsequent attempts to keep on the right side of Archbishop McQuaid were as much to do with political expediency as any religious conviction.





If anything, the FF party and its policies of the 20s and 30s were closer to the Obama rhetoric of "Yes, we can". CnaG were the fiscal conservatives.

I understand that, I was more making a point about the image that FF created.

baalthor

Mahatma coat wrote: »

there is only one Question in Irish Politics

' are ya a Fianna Fail Man or What?? '

and there is only one acceptable answer where I come from



Fianna Fail are the biggest party in the country because their particular btrand of corrupt cronyism is something that the majority of the population identify with, there may be people here on boards who railed against FF druring the boom years, but the majority of the population endorsed their schemin as it proved to be useful for them, FF Control Grassroots politics in Rural Ireland, I would not be surprised in the slightest if all we see after the next election is a reshuffle of the cabinet.

Historicaly FF have been the party that Drove things Forward

Up until the 80s at least, you could identify where people stood by the newspaper they purchased.

Where I come from it was:

Irish Press: Fianna Fail

Independent: Fine Gael

Irish Times: "Protestants"

Heaven help the person who unknowingly brought the "wrong" paper home!

Denerick

I still get mocked by my father for buying the Irish Times. Calls me a 'fecking Orangeman' any times he sees me reading it.

Liam Byrne

baalthor wrote: »

Up until the 80s at least, you could identify where people stood by the newspaper they purchased.

Where I come from it was:

Irish Press: Fianna Fail

Independent: Fine Gael

Irish Times: "Protestants"

Heaven help the person who unknowingly brought the "wrong" paper home!

That might explain why I'm "different" to most........Dad used to buy The Examiner and both The Irish Independent AND The Irish Press....definitely both of the latter every Sunday.

Now I wouldn't even bother with a Sunday "newspaper", and I'd only buy The Irish Examiner during the week.

Apogee

baalthor wrote: »

I understand that, I was more making a point about the image that FF created.

Politicians pretending they're "men of the people", salt of the earth types who came from average backgrounds, is hardly unique to FF.

A case in point - The Daily Show, April 22, 4min 30s in:
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart/4od#3055734

steelcityblues

To answer the original question : the 'soft' republicanism factor - enough people still bought into it election after election, but the old Republican guard started to fade away after Lynch (born after 1916) became leader!

rightwingdub

steelcityblues wrote: »

To answer the original question : the 'soft' republicanism factor - enough people still bought into it election after election, but the old Republican guard started to fade away after Lynch (born after 1916) became leader!

FF executed more Republicans during the second world war than the sectarian unionist government in the North did, how anyone seriously believes that FF are a Republican party is absolutely mind boggling.

FF have a vested interest in ensuring that partition remains in Ireland.

goat2

loldog wrote: »

FF for the farmers. The farmers dole, the repudiation of land annuities, that sort of thing.

.

right now i dont know
they are going to stop turfcutting
can only spread manure certain times of the year
one off houses for family member are quickly becomong a thing of the past
it is the big businessmen who can build 100 houses at a time

danman

Oh, you've opened a hornets nest now.
Did you not know, one off housing is evil?

goat2

danman wrote: »

Oh, you've opened a hornets nest now.
Did you not know, one off housing is evil?

no evil in that.

there are green belts ruined with houses by the hundred put into one small place, now no one want them
oh la la