Irish peoples double standards / hypocrisy

mikemac

How does a Palestinian flag manage to appear at these protests.

Now I could almost understand it when Tony Blair was in Dublin, he was/is an envoy in the Middle East.

But I see that flag at most every protest, most were organized and never mentioned that cause. But for every protest you have more groups looking joining in, even if the organizers never meet them
Seems to be a fashionable cause.

PARKHEAD67

phasers wrote: »

Really? I think they're eejits

Sure they are. They have the balls to stand up to their government not like us.We're the eejits.well, unless your from D4 and daddy got you a new fianna fail funded merc for passing your exams.

Einhard

Flygimp wrote: »

Did you say you live in a democracy? As in a country where transparency and accountability of government is at the fore. Where public servants (within government and credible opposition parties) have real policies on domestic and international fronts... f*ck me over please, go back to daycare!

Eh, no. As in a country where the people get to elect their representatives and choose their leaders. Did they not teach you about such things in daycare?

cedissapointed

''Slaves do not get paid. They are owned by other people, and are usually beaten to within an inch of their lives if they do not work hard enough.''

''Slavery has all but been done away with today, but that Eastern European hooker that your friend rode last week is beaten on a regular basis and has to hand over about 95% of the money she earns. She's a slave.''

''Somebody working in a low paid job is a person working in a low paid job. They can walk away at any time. Your friend's latest conquest cannot.''




I guess we can all say we are 'self employed'.. And..Belittling this to what your friend did to a hooker who probably had a black eye and some jizz on her face is neither here nor there to the FAS scandal that is ROBBING OUR COUNTRY OF PAID JOBS!

Working for FAS for free is SLAVE LABOUR,and as for your hooker it is a pity someone like me isnt there to put a metal rod up ur dirty faced arse

Working for free by todays working standards is being a slave , ce workers are treated with no respect and dignity..

Sharkey 10

feelingstressed wrote: »

How does a Palestinian flag manage to appear at these protests.

Now I could almost understand it when Tony Blair was in Dublin, he was/is an envoy in the Middle East.

But I see that flag at most every protest, most were organized and never mentioned that cause. But for every protest you have more groups looking joining in, even if the organizers never meet them
Seems to be a fashionable cause.

Protesting against the occupation of palestine seems too be quite fashionable atm just like the occupation of kurdistan was in vouge in the 70's but at least people are protesting against it which is positive i suppose .
Are plo scarves in fashion atm or are people wearing them in solidarity with the Palestinians?

crash davis

I've often wondered about this issue myself and why is it that as a nation we're kinda apathetic towards the politics of our own country. Could it be that we enjoy having something to whinge about, particularly when we can have a few digs at our own? Or maybe it's more deep rooted than that: we fought hard for our independence and now we subconciously believe that what we have now, whether it's rubbish or great, is better than anything we had before?

I mean, France fought their own establishment for freedom - the monarchy..... it just involved their own country so it's in their nature to revolt within their own country whereas we were the opposite. Does that make sense or am I waffling?!

oldyouth

I bet anyone that the majority of those students who protested during the week never put a hand in their pocket once for their college costs, their parents did. It won't matter to them if it is €1,500 or €3,000 a year to register. It was a day out for them to talk about how they 'stood up' for what they believed in and how radical they are. Feckin' students.

Mike 1972

cedissapointed wrote: »

Slavery has all but been done away with today

In Western Countries (the darker corners of the sex industry excepted) maybe........

Sharkey 10 wrote: »

Are plo scarves in fashion atm or are people wearing them in solidarity with the Palestinians?

PLO scarves are sooooo 1990's dude

Hamas FTW :rolleyes:

Sharkey 10

oldyouth wrote: »

I bet anyone that the majority of those students who protested during the week never put a hand in their pocket once for their college costs, their parents did. It won't matter to them if it is €1,500 or €3,000 a year to register. It was a day out for them to talk about how they 'stood up' for what they believed in and how radical they are. Feckin' students.

Well said , i almost sure you are right but the ones who were involved in the "violence" and i use that tern very loosely, were the ones who may have been digging into there own pockets. Whether or not some students pay for there own tuition i believe the recognized that what may be imposed on them was wrong

Terry

cedissapointed wrote: »

''Slaves do not get paid. They are owned by other people, and are usually beaten to within an inch of their lives if they do not work hard enough.''

''Slavery has all but been done away with today, but that Eastern European hooker that your friend rode last week is beaten on a regular basis and has to hand over about 95% of the money she earns. She's a slave.''

''Somebody working in a low paid job is a person working in a low paid job. They can walk away at any time. Your friend's latest conquest cannot.''




I guess we can all say we are 'self employed'.. And..Belittling this to what your friend did to a hooker who probably had a black eye and some jizz on her face is neither here nor there to the FAS scandal that is ROBBING OUR COUNTRY OF PAID JOBS!

Working for FAS for free is SLAVE LABOUR,and as for your hooker it is a pity someone like me isnt there to put a metal rod up ur dirty faced arse

Working for free by todays working standards is being a slave , ce workers are treated with no respect and dignity..

You seem to be quite angry.
I suggest adding this to a playlist and looping it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zh-klfBJlHc

oldyouth

Sharkey 10 wrote: »

Well said , i almost sure you are right but the ones who were involved in the "violence" and i use that tern very loosely, were the ones who may have been digging into there own pockets. Whether or not some students pay for there own tuition i believe the recognized that what may be imposed on them was wrong

They were political activists with a different agenda altogether

dotsman

Sharkey 10 wrote: »

Ive noticed over the last year but particularly with two recent events that irish people seem to like to see strong protest or something meaningful when its abroad.
The two instances that come to mind are the paint pouring on harney and the driving of the truck up to the gates of the dail.

Most people complain that we are too passive when it comes to taking cut backs but when someone goes a little bit further to highlight their anger then many of the same people will condemn those actions .

Any sensible person would highly criticise the actions of the paint thrower and the truck driver in question. What did they achieve other than throw their toys out of the pram? Their actions in no way had any positive influence on the governing of this country.

Sharkey 10 wrote: »

Most Irish people applauded the French over the last two weeks for their actions over the last few weeks but if the same happened here people would be up in arms .

They did? As far as I can remember, everybody I talked to about the French strikers thought they were the biggest fools ever.

Sharkey 10 wrote: »

Edit : how could i forget about the student protests , their was minimal violence here but by some of the reporting you would think ww3 had kicked off. Btw im not sure how many students were there with an intent of protesting my sister said they were drinking on the bus up and when the got back to the college there were free drinks for everyone

The student protests were a sham. The problem with protests is that they have to be for a legitimate reason (ie, if the students in question were proposing a viable alternative, but felt they were not being listened to, then it would make sense). As it stands, these sort of protests are simple bullying. In the case of the protest last week, it was a bunch of people who were there for a variety of reasons. Most were simply fools who thought they could have a day out and something constructive would come out of it. For many, it was a laugh, have a day out, have a few drinks etc. Some were absolute scumbags (possibly not even students) who are affiliated with extreme left wing organisations who just saw the day as a chance to commit crimes without repercussions.

lmaopml

oldyouth wrote: »

I bet anyone that the majority of those students who protested during the week never put a hand in their pocket once for their college costs, their parents did. It won't matter to them if it is €1,500 or €3,000 a year to register. It was a day out for them to talk about how they 'stood up' for what they believed in and how radical they are. Feckin' students.

I totally disagree. I know there are 'besters' who love to bleed the system for all it's worth, but at the end of the day I think it's pretty cool that we have pretty much a 'free' education system and equal opportunities for those who are very bright and get some support to continue their education - even if we have to pay a certain amount it's by no means excessive as far as other countries are concerned.

It's one of the 'worst' and 'best' things about this little Island that we have a decent SW system....It's a pity we don't value it as a 'whole' for single parents, students, old age pensioners etc. etc. enough to work for it, and demand the money is put to good use - when we have/had it of course..! Maybe next time huh?

This is a great country in many many ways, worth 'working' for..

Stupid paint throwers and government building stormers are just that - stupid! (".)

Pompey Magnus

Einhard wrote: »

And you forget that we live in a parliamentary democracy where we elect our own leaders, and thus have no justification for violent insurrection of any kind.

No you forget that in 1916 the Irish people lived in a parliamentary democracy also.

lmaopml

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

No you forget that in 1916 the Irish people lived in a parliamentary democracy also.

LOL!

oldyouth

lmaopml wrote: »

I totally disagree. I know there are 'besters' who love to bleed the system for all it's worth, but at the end of the day I think it's pretty cool that we have pretty much a 'free' education system and equal opportunities for those who are very bright and get some support to continue their education - even if we have to pay a certain amount it's by no means excessive as far as other countries are concerned.

It's one of the 'worst' and 'best' things about this little Island that we have a decent SW system....It's a pity we don't value it as a 'whole' for single parents, students, old age pensioners etc. etc. enough to work for it, and demand the money is put to good use - when we have/had it of course..! Maybe next time huh?

This is a great country in many many ways, worth 'working' for..

Stupid paint throwers and government building stormers are just that - stupid! (".)

Sorry, haven't got a clue as to what your point is.

I was arguing that the students who attended the protest did it as a kind of 'right of passage' that seems to rubber stamp their attendance at university. The majority never paid a penny towards their education, their parents did. (I'm one and plesed to do it having worked bloody hard for the privilage). Most of them went back to their apartments (which Mummy & Daddy pay for) and felt really pleased with themselves.

Pompey Magnus

lmaopml wrote: »

LOL!

You might find it funny but it is true, we were British subjects in what was perhaps the oldest Parliamentary Democracy. We elected our own representatives to Parliament so if Einhard believes that as we today have no right to non-violent protest as we live in such a system then I wonder if he extends his criticism to the 1916 rebels who also lived in this type of system?

lmaopml

oldyouth wrote: »

Sorry, haven't got a clue as to what your point is.

I was arguing that the students who attended the protest did it as a kind of 'right of passage' that seems to rubber stamp their attendance at university. The majority never paid a penny towards their education, their parents did. (I'm one and plesed to do it having worked bloody hard for the privilage). Most of them went back to their apartments (which Mummy & Daddy pay for) and felt really pleased with themselves.

Well, oldyouth that's something you can be really proud of so? Good on you! At the same time 'generalising' about the 'mummy and daddy' syndrome of students who attend college is a bit ott? There are very very many students who are extremely bright and quite simply couldn't afford the fees...I have a niece studying Science Ed in Maynooth this year, and 'mummy and daddy' are on the dole cause of the recession - she will need help, no? A straight 'A' student who needs support..

They need to be supported. Education is so important. I'm a parent of two little boys, and I am sincerely glad of a system that is not 'elitist' as regards uni and third level education. Anybody who thinks it's 'elite' is absolutely not living in the real world - there are opportunities for everybody on this island if you have drive enough and staying power...

The 'cost' is minimal by comparison.

lmaopml

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

You might find it funny but it is true, we were British subjects in what was perhaps the oldest Parliamentary Democracy. We elected our own representatives to Parliament so if Einhard believes that as we today have no right to non-violent protest as we live in such a system then I wonder if he extends his criticism to the 1916 rebels who also lived in this type of system?

They were different times Pompey, we wrote our own 'epitaph' this time round - take it on the chin, and move on...

Pompey Magnus

lmaopml wrote: »

They were different times Pompey, we wrote our own 'epitaph' this time round - take it on the chin, and move on...

When you say different times I would have to challenge you on that, its not like Cromwell was rampaging through the country killing all before him, this was less than 100 years ago. Ireland was a functioning member of the British Empire, alright the majority of people were looking for Home Rule (not full independence by the way) but there was a democratic mechanism available within the British system for the Irish people to voice their concerns. Yet here is what the OP was getting at, Irish people who apply double standards to justify in their own mind their hypocrisy. Excusing some forms of violent action while condemning others.

Einhard

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

No you forget that in 1916 the Irish people lived in a parliamentary democracy also.

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

You might find it funny but it is true, we were British subjects in what was perhaps the oldest Parliamentary Democracy. We elected our own representatives to Parliament so if Einhard believes that as we today have no right to non-violent protest as we live in such a system then I wonder if he extends his criticism to the 1916 rebels who also lived in this type of system?

I suspect you realise that in 1916 Ireland hadn't the right to self-determination. We sent representatives to a foreign parliament where their agenda was ignored, obstructed, overruled, and denied by a foreign elite who made all the decisions on Ireland, and did so both without the consent of the Irish people themselves, and against thir clearly articulated wishes. Therein lies the difference between contemporary Irish society and that of Collins and de Valera.

lmaopml

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

When you say different times I would have to challenge you on that, its not like Cromwell was rampaging through the country killing all before him, this was less than 100 years ago. Ireland was a functioning member of the British Empire, alright the majority of people were looking for Home Rule (not full independence by the way) but there was a democratic mechanism available within the British system for the Irish people to voice their concerns. Yet here is what the OP was getting at, Irish people who apply double standards to justify in their own mind their hypocrisy. Excusing some forms of violent action while condemning others.

Jeepurs, this is 'history'! It's not comparative really to 'today' and the challenges we face 'today'....we can sing the anthems etc. etc. but let's be real, it's a different set of circumstances....we're facing? No?

Let's get up to date, and real? deal with today for answers and not look to the past - 800 years??? etc. etc. Low lie the fields of Athenry etc.

We bought this? Let's deal with it, we can if we get real.

Pompey Magnus

Einhard wrote: »

I suspect you realise that in 1916 Ireland hadn't the right to self-determination. We sent representatives to a foreign parliament where their agenda was ignored, obstructed, overruled, and denied by a foreign elite who made all the decisions on Ireland, and did so both without the consent of the Irish people themselves, and against thir clearly articulated wishes. Therein lies the difference between contemporary Irish society and that of Collins and de Valera.

I suspect you know that the democratic will of the Irish people in 1916 was that Ireland should get Home Rule, not full independence, there is a very big difference. The rebels were not acting as representatives of the democratic will of the Irish people at the time. The issue of foreign recognition of Irish self determination only arose after 1916.

lmaopml

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

I suspect you know that the democratic will of the Irish people in 1916 was that Ireland should get Home Rule, not full independence, there is a very big difference. The rebels were not acting as representatives of the democratic will of the Irish people at the time. The issue of foreign recognition of Irish self determination only arose after 1916.

Other than a 'nod' to our past, which is imo most deserved! What has that got to do with how we face the challenges of today? Is there something to learn? What is it?

Paint throwing? That's really underwhelming!

Pompey Magnus

lmaopml wrote: »

Jeepurs, this is 'history'! It's not comparative really to 'today' and the challenges we face 'today'....we can sing the anthems etc. etc. but let's be real, it's a different set of circumstances....we're facing? No?

Let's get up to date, and real? deal with today for answers and not look to the past - 800 years??? etc. etc. Low lie the fields of Athenry etc.

We bought this? Let's deal with it, we can if we get real.

I'm not specifically talking about recessions or how we get out of the mess we are in, I am talking about the actual topic of this thread. Perhaps you should re-read the OP because you seem to be taking things off on a tangent.

lmaopml

I'm setting a tangent to the sack now! Night!

Einhard

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

I suspect you know that the democratic will of the Irish people in 1916 was that Ireland should get Home Rule, not full independence, there is a very big difference. The rebels were not acting as representatives of the democratic will of the Irish people at the time. The issue of foreign recognition of Irish self determination only arose after 1916.

The issue of foreign recognition of Irish independence came after 1921 actually. Until that time the point was moot because Irish people were denied the right of self-determination by a foreign parliament. Incidentally, Home Rule was not the "democratic will" of the Irish people; rather it was the only choice offered to them. On top of that, even that limited concession had been denied to Ireland for decades, and even when it was seriously offered, it was often in return for the support of Irish MPs for the governing party in Britain at that particular time. None of this amounts to self-determination, none of this equates to the freedoms that Irish people have to run their own affairs today. To argue therefore that the political lot of contemporary Ireland is akin to that of 100 years ago is both ahistorical and nonsensical.

Pompey Magnus

Einhard wrote: »

Incidentally, Home Rule was not the "democratic will" of the Irish people; rather it was the only choice offered to them.

It was the democratic will of the people, the Irish people elected representatives to parliament on the mandate of seeking Home Rule, therefore the democratic will of the Irish people was that aim. The reaction of the citizens of Dublin by pelting rotten vegetables and verbal abuse on the men who sought full indepence as they were led away from the GPO shows just what these citizens thought of their aims and if you want to argue otherwise fire ahead but back up your claim in such a way as to discount these two historical facts.

On top of that, even that limited concession had been denied to Ireland for decades, and even when it was seriously offered, it was often in return for the support of Irish MPs for the governing party in Britain at that particular time. None of this amounts to self-determination, none of this equates to the freedoms that Irish people have to run their own affairs today.

This is getting off topic, you argued that citizens of a parliamentary democracy have no right to non-violent protests. I just pointed out that Irish citizens in 1916 were in a parliamentary democracy and the lowliest Irish person's vote then had exactly the same weight as Lloyd George's or Winston Churchill's.

That the Irish people couldn't get what they want was due to them being a minority grouping within the democratic system, that is how democracy works. The act of the 1916 rising was a violent action against parliamentary democracy where a small subsection of the greater population were unhappy that they couldn't get what they wanted through peaceful politics so they took up arms to force through their demands.

In my opinion this was the right course of action, but I can say this as I don't have the double standards of automatically denouncing all forms of non-violent protest in today's society.

To argue therefore that the political lot of contemporary Ireland is akin to that of 100 years ago is both ahistorical and nonsensical.

I didn't argue that at all so less of the straw man argument please.

cc-offe

It's very true, 2 years ago they were trying to build a incinerator type thing near where I lived, the people trying to set it up were very sly about the whole thing, anyway it would have meant that there would have been 20ish trucks driving through every day (on already bad roads) and there was numerous other reasons why we were objecting, they pulled the planning application anyway after they got so many objections, anyway my point is this.......if that had been going anywhere else then I wouldn't have cared......as long as it wasn't near me

oldyouth

lmaopml wrote: »

Well, oldyouth that's something you can be really proud of so? Good on you! At the same time 'generalising' about the 'mummy and daddy' syndrome of students who attend college is a bit ott? There are very very many students who are extremely bright and quite simply couldn't afford the fees...I have a niece studying Science Ed in Maynooth this year, and 'mummy and daddy' are on the dole cause of the recession - she will need help, no? A straight 'A' student who needs support..

They need to be supported. Education is so important. I'm a parent of two little boys, and I am sincerely glad of a system that is not 'elitist' as regards uni and third level education. Anybody who thinks it's 'elite' is absolutely not living in the real world - there are opportunities for everybody on this island if you have drive enough and staying power...

The 'cost' is minimal by comparison.

If you read both my posts, I said the 'majority' never paid for their own tuition. I never commented about the right of all young people to attend university. By becoming a highly educated country, we might just get out of this recession. My point was about the protest.

I have put one lad through college and will shortly be paying double to put the other lad through. I was made redundant this year but, thankfully, have now found a job paying half what I used to earn. I'm not funding their college education to be elitist, I'm just trying to do my best for them. However, if I heard they were causing trouble at a protest march because of the hike in fees (which I paid for on their behalf), I'd be pissed off.