Vincent Browne takes on United Left Alliance

Denerick

I've always liked Vincent Browne. He's ripping poor Richard Boyd Barret apart right now on TV3. Good stuff.

I think a lot of these far left types live in each others pockets and rarely come into contact with conflicting viewpoints and hence are incapable of stating their often silly positions in a credible or believable way. Its good that this populism is exposed for the abject stupidity and delusion that it is.

EricPraline

Vincent absolutely demolished Richard Boyd Barrett's shambolic attempts at blagging on economic policy.

It was entertaining to see him demand an explanation of how he proposed raising €19bn. Through some massive spoofing RBB managed to get to €6bn. Same thing with the vague wealth tax idea - essentially RBB suggested that nationalised banks would confiscate money, somehow. These people are appealing to pure populism, nothing more.

Brussels Sprout

Richard Boyd Barret's economic logic

1. Burn the Bondholders
2. Avoid dealing with the consequences of this
3. (Step missing)
4. Profit!!

p1akuw47h5r3it

I think I would cry if these people ever got into any kind of power....Then emigrate

LeixlipRed

Everyone misses the point, not going to be in power, don't believe in the system but none of you have figured it out yet. The only reason we want to be in the Dail is to give us a platform to build a mass movement to overthrow capitalism. We're not going in there to join parliamentary committees to decide how many pay rises Ivor Callely deserves. People keep talking about populism, when has anyone from the ULA ever claimed they'll be in power to have to find the 19bn?

Killer Pigeon

This is where ULA fail (in Russian accent):

"We shall disassociate from anything remotely capitalist, we shall market our campaign on facebook and twitter."

johnnyskeleton

Denerick wrote: »

I've always liked Vincent Browne. He's ripping poor Richard Boyd Barret apart right now on TV3. Good stuff.

I think a lot of these far left types live in each others pockets and rarely come into contact with conflicting viewpoints and hence are incapable of stating their often silly positions in a credible or believable way. Its good that this populism is exposed for the abject stupidity and delusion that it is.

But every time Vincent airs his own beliefs it is more or less the same as the United Left Alliance - "The poor can't pay / protect our nurses / tax the rich / grumble grumble".

Ok, fair enough he gives everyone a grilling, but there comes a point at which you have to take a step back and realise that he is not an insightful interveiwer who teases out subtle points with his guests - he's just a cranky old man that gets on people's nerves and, as a result, they look bad on TV.

Lame Lantern

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Everyone misses the point, not going to be in power, don't believe in the system but none of you have figured it out yet. The only reason we want to be in the Dail is to give us a platform to build a mass movement to overthrow capitalism. We're not going in there to join parliamentary committees to decide how many pay rises Ivor Callely deserves. People keep talking about populism, when has anyone from the ULA ever claimed they'll be in power to have to find the 19bn?

Maybe it is incumbent upon any political party standing on a platform of alternative economic policy to have their economic policies at least make sense?

johnnyskeleton

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Everyone misses the point, not going to be in power, don't believe in the system but none of you have figured it out yet. The only reason we want to be in the Dail is to give us a platform to build a mass movement to overthrow capitalism. We're not going in there to join parliamentary committees to decide how many pay rises Ivor Callely deserves. People keep talking about populism, when has anyone from the ULA ever claimed they'll be in power to have to find the 19bn?

Isn't the problem that if they actually ran on that platform no one would vote for them at all? So they have to pretend to have a more moderate view on the economy.

gandalf

Vincent Browne did a public service tonight getting the ULA loons on to show them for the economic incompetents that they are. Christ put next to them Sinn Feins policies now look coherent.

Has confirmed my suspicion that a vote for the ULA is a wasted vote.

LeixlipRed

Did you read my post at all?

LeixlipRed

gandalf wrote: »

Vincent Browne did a public service tonight getting the ULA loons on to show them for the economic incompetents that they are. Christ put next to them Sinn Feins policies now look coherent.

Has confirmed my suspicion that a vote for the ULA is a wasted vote.

ULA and SF's policies are identical.

LeixlipRed

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Isn't the problem that if they actually ran on that platform no one would vote for them at all? So they have to pretend to have a more moderate view on the economy.

Possibly. I'm not running the electoral campaign. But if anyone asks me on the doorstep about it I'll be honest with them. RBB and Keiran Allen both touched on it tonight. It's not too difficult to spend 5 minutes google the SP and SWP to figure out their policies. This isn't some big lie that we're afraid is gonna be revealed the day before polling.

runman

Denerick wrote: »

I've always liked Vincent Browne. He's ripping poor Richard Boyd Barret apart right now on TV3. Good stuff.

I think a lot of these far left types live in each others pockets and rarely come into contact with conflicting viewpoints and hence are incapable of stating their often silly positions in a credible or believable way. Its good that this populism is exposed for the abject stupidity and delusion that it is.

Any chance i can see a clip of vinny in action?

Sir Oxman

I have to agree with LeixlipRed.

All three at one stage said they know they will never be in power or be approached by any of FG or Labour to support those parties in the Dail if they get a few members elected.

Their reason for uniting as a single entity is to get a foothold in the Dail and use that as a platform to espouse and mobilise their beliefs.
They were very clear and upfront about this objective.

IMO, we will see at least 3 to 4 ULA in the next Dail.

RGDATA!

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Everyone misses the point, not going to be in power, don't believe in the system but none of you have figured it out yet. The only reason we want to be in the Dail is to give us a platform to build a mass movement to overthrow capitalism. We're not going in there to join parliamentary committees to decide how many pay rises Ivor Callely deserves. People keep talking about populism, when has anyone from the ULA ever claimed they'll be in power to have to find the 19bn?

if that's true what was RBB doing struggling to explain where the money would come from? Why don't they just run on the platform you've described, instead of one which makes us miss the point?

aidan24326

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Richard Boyd Barret's economic logic

1. Burn the Bondholders
2. Avoid dealing with the consequences of this
3. (Step missing)
4. Profit!!

But that in itself is not the problem, serious economics experts have said that's exactly what we should do, renege on at least some of the banking debt (particularly Anglo and Irish Nationwide).

The problem with the ULA is that they say these 'nice-sounding' things, like reverse the cuts, increase spending, burn the bondholders etc, but minus a framework for how they would actually go about this, it becomes nothing more than rabble-rousing bullsh1t.

LeixlipRed

RGDATA! wrote: »

if that's true what was RBB doing struggling to explain where the money would come from? Why don't they just run on the platform you've described, instead of one which makes us miss the point?

Ok, preparing for a long post here. There are several reasons why. We're playing politics firstly. We know that if we come out with a campaign entitled, "one solution....revolution" we'd never be elected. So we've attempted to craft economic policies that would work within the constraints of the current system. The policies are not perfect with this system, no one in the ULA would argue that they are. We're not attempting to mislead people, we're not totting up figures on the doorsteps for people, we're telling them we will stand up for the working class, we will fight against conservative right-wing policies.

Secondly, the SP and PbP/SWP have slight ideological differences with regards to electoralism. The SP believe that revolution comes from populating parliament with socialists and hence persuading the masses to pursue socialism, the SWP feel only a mass movement can bring that change about. Anyway, there is an extremely remote possibility of a coalition on the left, hence the ULA would be in power and would have some say of implementing policy within the current system. It's a minute possibility, statistically insignificant but the ULA would technically be willing to work within a coalition of the left, i.e. Labour, SF, ourselves + independents. Hence, we have to have some policies which can be enacted within that system.

Min

Richard Boyd Barrett didn't know it was FF being afraid of the pensioners that changed that policy, the ULA will have no one in government who is afraid of upsetting the ULA, the ULA will not be voting for government parties.

Lame Lantern

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Ok, preparing for a long post here. There are several reasons why. We're playing politics firstly. We know that if we come out with a campaign entitled, "one solution....revolution" we'd never be elected. So we've attempted to craft economic policies that would work within the constraints of the current system. The policies are not perfect with this system, no one in the ULA would argue that they are. We're not attempting to mislead people, we're not totting up figures on the doorsteps for people, we're telling them we will stand up for the working class, we will fight against conservative right-wing policies.

Secondly, the SP and PbP/SWP have slight ideological differences with regards to electoralism. The SP believe that revolution comes from populating parliament with socialists and hence persuading the masses to pursue socialism, the SWP feel only a mass movement can bring that change about. Anyway, there is an extremely remote possibility of a coalition on the left, hence the ULA would be in power and would have some say of implementing policy within the current system. It's a minute possibility, statistically insignificant but the ULA would technically be willing to work within a coalition of the left, i.e. Labour, SF, ourselves + independents. Hence, we have to have some policies which can be enacted within that system.

So, campaigning under the banner of a supposedly realistic alternative economic policy, they're in fact lying to the people and hoping to foist some "revolution" on them?

Is this what having a social conscience means?

LeixlipRed

Yeh, that's exactly what I said. Despite explicitly stating the opposite. No one is going to be tricked into radicalisation. I know RBB and Keiran Allen personally, these people aren't deviously planning to fool one million people into burning the Dail down. Get into parliament, build a platform, encourage a mass movement to strikes/protests/campaigns, through being involved with these actions people will become open to the idea of revolutionary politics and become radicalised. Exactly like what's sweeping the Middle East at the moment, normal people on the streets because the situation was so bad that they had to do something.

Min

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Yeh, that's exactly what I said. Despite explicitly stating the opposite. No one is going to be tricked into radicalisation. I know RBB and Keiran Allen personally, these people aren't deviously planning to fool one million people into burning the Dail down. Get into parliament, build a platform, encourage a mass movement to strikes/protests/campaigns, through being involved with these actions people will become open to the idea of revolutionary politics and become radicalised. Exactly like what's sweeping the Middle East at the moment, normal people on the streets because the situation was so bad that they had to do something.

That will solve nothing - strikes and protests, the people will vote in a democratic government, Ireland is not like the middle east.

Strikes and protests against the government?

loldog

RGDATA! wrote: »

if that's true what was RBB doing struggling to explain where the money would come from? Why don't they just run on the platform you've described, instead of one which makes us miss the point?

I would guess he's using his platform on national TV to throw a few spanners in the works of the capitalist machinery. If you can put some ideas out there, especially ones that highlight the injustices of the current order, you can stir up some agitation for policies like burning the bondholders which would really shake things up - possibly even bring down the Euro.

.

PomBear

LeixlipRed wrote: »

ULA and SF's policies are identical.

Sometimes I really wish the politics forum had a facepalm smiley

LuckyLloyd

Good stuff Leixlip Red. An informed vote for the ULA is not simply a protest vote against the established parties, it is in essence a protest vote against the structure and machinations of the system as it exists now.

Personally speaking, while I am not on board with the ULA I would like to see them get a couple of seats. I think plurality of opinion is vital for any healthy democratic system - and that includes an opinion that the whole thing stinks and should be dismantled and completely re-imagined again.

All that said, you will have to develop a thick skin as the campaign progresses. There will be an army of media commentators and supporters of the main parties falling over themselves to rip apart your efforts with a couple of bullet points on holes in economic policy. It's a nice one for them - they get the satisfaction of hitting an easy target and getting to say "job done".

The best of luck with the canvassing - should be interesting stuff!

Cavehill Red

Lame Lantern wrote: »

Maybe it is incumbent upon any political party standing on a platform of alternative economic policy to have their economic policies at least make sense?

You mean like Fianna Fail's 2007 manifesto?

zig

for someone like myself who is against the imf bailout and fears what it could do to the country over the next 10 years its exteremly frustating watching the ULA in action on these kind of shows. They make is sound so rosy which is not true.
If we were to burn the bondholders/default, there would be massive issues that would have to dealt with. I acknowledge this, but in my opinion its still the best decision of a bad lot. unfortunately no one on the left will admit this.

I wish someone would just simply come out and say 'if we default things will be absolotely horrible short term, but we will be starting fresh' thats the way i see it, but no politician would sacrifice his votes by making drastic cuts due to a default.
My opinion is, the bailout is like a terminal cancer, but a default is like a severe heart attack followed by a bypass, where you then slowly begin to start your new healthy life!!:D

Cavehill Red

zig wrote: »

for someone like myself who is against the imf bailout and fears what it could do to the country over the next 10 years its exteremly frustating watching the ULA in action on these kind of shows. They make is sound so rosy which is not true.
If we were to burn the bondholders/default, there would be massive issues that would have to dealt with. I acknowledge this, but in my opinion its still the best decision of a bad lot. unfortunately no one on the left will admit this.

I wish someone would just simply come out and say 'if we default things will be absolotely horrible short term, but we will be starting fresh' thats the way i see it, but no politician would sacrifice his votes by making drastic cuts due to a default.
My opinion is, the bailout is like a terminal cancer, but a default is like a severe heart attack followed by a bypass, where you then slowly begin to start your new healthy life!!:D

McWilliams is stating it in this manner. To a much lesser extent, the Shinners. The ULA need to process their economic understanding to a much higher level.

LuckyLloyd

Lame Lantern wrote: »

Maybe it is incumbent upon any political party standing on a platform of alternative economic policy to have their economic policies at least make sense?

None of Labour, FG or FF's economic policies make sense either! They provide an illusion of sense and the sheen of reality. Most of the figures I've seen are based on laughably optimistic forecasts of economic growth and consequent tax intake.

Now, I know which side of the political coin annoys me more...

Chucky the tree

Cavehill Red wrote: »

You mean like Fianna Fail's 2007 manifesto?

Doesn't that just prove how dangerous it is to elect a party who aren't economically inept, like the ULA.

Cavehill Red

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Doesn't that just prove how dangerous it is to elect a party who aren't economically inept, like the ULA.

Well, it proves it is dangerous to elect Fianna Fail.
Beyond that, it doesn't prove much.
As another poster just said, so long as all parties are producing policies based on fantasy projections sourced by the same imagineers in the Dept of Finance who produced the 2007 projections, then no matter how thorough the number-crunching or how subtle the economic understanding they possess, all the manifestoes amount to nothing more than blank cheques written with funny money.
In this regard, ULA's fantasy economics are no less valid than those of Fianna Fail or Fine Gael. If a difference exists, it is that the latter two are much more dangerous because a) people may believe they have some validity and b) they may be in a position to attempt to implement those policies.

Chucky the tree

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Well, it proves it is dangerous to elect Fianna Fail.
Beyond that, it doesn't prove much.
As another poster just said, so long as all parties are producing policies based on fantasy projections sourced by the same imagineers in the Dept of Finance who produced the 2007 projections, then no matter how thorough the number-crunching or how subtle the economic understanding they possess, all the manifestoes amount to nothing more than blank cheques written with funny money.
In this regard, ULA's fantasy economics are no less valid than those of Fianna Fail or Fine Gael. If a difference exists, it is that the latter two are much more dangerous because a) people may believe they have some validity and b) they may be in a position to attempt to implement those policies.

Other parties projections aren't fantasy though, they can realistically be fixed even if projections do turn out to be incorrect. ULA or Sinn Fein's policies have zero chance of ever working out. That's the difference, and it's a pretty major one.

Lame Lantern

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Yeh, that's exactly what I said. Despite explicitly stating the opposite. No one is going to be tricked into radicalisation. I know RBB and Keiran Allen personally, these people aren't deviously planning to fool one million people into burning the Dail down. Get into parliament, build a platform, encourage a mass movement to strikes/protests/campaigns, through being involved with these actions people will become open to the idea of revolutionary politics and become radicalised. Exactly like what's sweeping the Middle East at the moment, normal people on the streets because the situation was so bad that they had to do something.

That does not solve the problem of these people running on the assumption that they have a credible alternative to the economic policies being presented in the mainstream while apparently knowing full well that their stated policies make quite literally no sense at all. They are canvassing people on this basis and the idea that their ambitions lie in reaching Dáil Éireann by intentionally presenting nonsensical options to the people in order to then further their ideological positions is deceit, plain and simple.

And frankly, trying to draw an anaology between Ireland, in which we have a functioning democracy and in which the ULA are allowed to stand even in spite of their plainly ludicrous opinions and autocratic Egypt where people must take to the streets because their rights and powers are simply non-existant is utterly crazy.

Cavehill Red

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Other parties projections aren't fantasy though, they can realistically be fixed even if projections do turn out to be incorrect. ULA or Sinn Fein's policies have zero chance of ever working out. That's the difference, and it's a pretty major one.

All policies are fantasy. Politics is the art of the possible.
Why couldn't FF's policies work out in 07, then?
Fact is, the Dept of Finance is SO drunk on their own kool-aid that their numbers, frankly, can only be guaranteed to bear nil relationship to reality in any timeframe specified.
Therefore, all policies based on such figures tend to zero in terms of their ability to be implemented as costed.

LuckyLloyd

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Other parties projections aren't fantasy though, they can realistically be fixed even if projections do turn out to be incorrect. ULA or Sinn Fein's policies have zero chance of ever working out. That's the difference, and it's a pretty major one.

I think you read enough in the other place we both frequent to know that isn't really true!

They can be fixed in so far as when these parties are in power they can keep passing on promises they made in their manifesto / constantly readjusting fantastical numbers to maintain stability (though that may become beyond them soon enough ). The difference between their projections / plans and the end result is not as great as the difference between what the ULA are selling and the current reality. Is that what you're arguing?

I mean, fair enough if so. But it's all bull****. We're arguing over the extent of the idiocy rather than the fact of its existence.

I think the problem with the ULA is exactly the motives that you are describing LeixlipRed. I mean, what exactly is so wrong with the current system (In general, not just focusing on the bank bailouts etc). We're not exactly starving as a country, the vast majority of the workforce have decent jobs which they *choose* to do, and people on the dole here get more money than most of the rest of the world's population get for working their asses off.

What improvements can a socialist (communist?) system bring to our society? All I can see it doing is staggering growth and reducing/removing freedoms, as it has done in every manifestation of itself throughout history.

nesf

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Everyone misses the point, not going to be in power, don't believe in the system but none of you have figured it out yet. The only reason we want to be in the Dail is to give us a platform to build a mass movement to overthrow capitalism. We're not going in there to join parliamentary committees to decide how many pay rises Ivor Callely deserves. People keep talking about populism, when has anyone from the ULA ever claimed they'll be in power to have to find the 19bn?

You're selling a bull**** message to gullable idiots with your carry on at the moment. I can respect any socialist voting for you, they at least know what they're doing, but some poor muppet is actually going to believe RBB is presenting a viable economic policy on which to run the country and actually go around thinking the other parties are screwing the public by not implementing the ULA's policies. Your policies are the worst kind of cynicism: "We don't need to worry about getting into power so eh, we can peddle any old garbage that'll grab us a few votes"

I could actually respect the ULA if they were running on a platform that was actually viable and that was informed by their left leaning views. Right now they just make me feel sorry for the economically illiterate in the country who'll be taken for a ride.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

jank

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Everyone misses the point, not going to be in power, don't believe in the system but none of you have figured it out yet. The only reason we want to be in the Dail is to give us a platform to build a mass movement to overthrow capitalism. We're not going in there to join parliamentary committees to decide how many pay rises Ivor Callely deserves. People keep talking about populism, when has anyone from the ULA ever claimed they'll be in power to have to find the 19bn?

Jeuse Fcuking christ. Is it 1917 or 2011...
Communism doesn't ****ing work.

It took almost 100 years and millions of lives to figure that one out.

OhNoYouDidn't

Denerick wrote: »

I've always liked Vincent Browne. He's ripping poor Richard Boyd Barret apart right now on TV3. Good stuff.

I think a lot of these far left types live in each others pockets and rarely come into contact with conflicting viewpoints and hence are incapable of stating their often silly positions in a credible or believable way. Its good that this populism is exposed for the abject stupidity and delusion that it is.

RBB is a lot of things, but stupid is not one of them.

And I do have to chuckle to myself when you accuse anyone of insularity.

Get used to him, he will be a TD in 6 weeks.

OhNoYouDidn't

jank wrote: »

Jeuse Fcuking christ. Is it 1917 or 2011...
Communism doesn't ****ing work.

It took almost 100 years and millions of lives to figure that one out.

And capitalism does?

Like it or not, ULA will pick up votes and probably seats because the current system is a failure.

Sponge Bob

I think Vincent was "harangued" by the labour Party for 'going easy' on Joe Higggins the night that Joan Burton totally lost it on his programme. Last nights programme was partially a balancing exercise to show that Vincent will not show fear or favour.

Mind you I thought that Boyd Barrett handled him relatively well seeing as he Vincent was on one of his rolls....not that I would ever vote ULA

EricPraline

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Everyone misses the point, not going to be in power, don't believe in the system but none of you have figured it out yet. The only reason we want to be in the Dail is to give us a platform to build a mass movement to overthrow capitalism. We're not going in there to join parliamentary committees to decide how many pay rises Ivor Callely deserves. People keep talking about populism, when has anyone from the ULA ever claimed they'll be in power to have to find the 19bn?

If anybody missed the point, I think it was you. So you're saying that the ULA have no interest in such tedious, banal matters as finding a way to fund Ireland's budget deficit. That's fine.

But if this is the case, then why was RBB pulling numbers and policies out of the air last night in an attempt to claim how the €19bn shortfall could be made up? Why didn't he simply admit that the ULA have interest in this problem and, once elected, intend to offer no constructive advice on how to solve it?

Either you and RBB have a different view of the policies espoused by the ULA, or RBB was blatantly lying to Vincent Browne (and the electorate).

sensibleken

Boyd Barrett is a poser first an foremost. I've had the displeasure of havign to deal with him many times over the years either in his guise as socialist workers party, globalise resistance, anti war movement, people before profit, ULA or whatever movement its going to be next week.

The usual steps he takes are...sees something lefty taking place, runs to teh front with a loudspeaker and claims leadership, then claims credit for the whole thing while those actually concerned or taking part say 'who the fck is this guy' to themselves.

Im convinced the only thing that guy is concerned about is his own ego and that is why you will never see any usefull or workable policies come out of him

BlaasForRafa

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

And capitalism does?

Like it or not, ULA will pick up votes and probably seats because the current system is a failure.

The country may have problems but its still nowhere near as bad as any communist country has been.

RBB and his hard-left comrades are economically illiterate spoofers who haven't a clue where the money to fund their precious public services and pay for their buddies on the dole.

Denerick

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Fixed your post.

All I can say is fair play to RBB. He must be doing something right if people are lining up to attack him with such vitriol.

The reason he is being attacked with such vitriol is because he is patently a delusional idiot. Vincent Browne exposed that last night. Were he not a delusional idiot he would not face any vitriol. Cause and effect my friend.

P. Breathnach

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

... All I can say is fair play to RBB. He must be doing something right if people are lining up to attack him with such vitriol.

You could apply the same reasoning to FF: given the vitriol being poured on them, they must be even more right than RBB.

BlaasForRafa

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Fixed your post.

All I can say is fair play to RBB. He must be doing something right if people are lining up to attack him with such vitriol.

Maybe you didn't read my sig?

Just because Cowen and his cronies are useless dosen't preclude RBB and his loony left mates from being clueless also.

sensibleken

What bloody annoys me most is that im a lefty and a socialist and these morons give us all a bad name. What the hell does 'over throwing capitalism mean?'

I also believe unfettered capitalism has failed but if you want to 'over throw' 'destroy' capitalism you have to have something waiting that will be better. but these groups don't have anything. They are simply against stuff.

OhNoYouDidn't

Denerick wrote: »

The reason he is being attacked with such vitriol is because he is patently a delusional idiot. Vincent Browne exposed that last night. Were he not a delusional idiot he would not face any vitriol. Cause and effect my friend.

But he patently is not an idiot, and having an opposing political viewpoint to you does not make him delusional.

He is getting vitriol from the right wing because he is advocating radical change.

OhNoYouDidn't

P. Breathnach wrote: »

You could apply the same reasoning to FF: given the vitriol being poured on them, they must be even more right than RBB.

No, the reason FF are being attacked is because they broke the country.

The reason RBB is being attacked is fearmongering.