Is this the start of violent rhetoric in the Dail?

The Waltzing Consumer

Before day one of the new Government begins, the ULA have held a press conference where, along with criticising the new coalition on various issues, certain TDs used quite violent language describing what would happen in certain conditions.

Here is the full article:
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/left-alliance-will-fight-sale-of-state-assets-to-the-death-2569484.html

The stand out quote came from Clare Daly who "used the strongest rhetoric by saying the sale of state assets would only happen "over our dead bodies"".

Whilst the TDs may be completely non-violent, and these comments may have been taken completely out of context, if newspapers continue to report them with headlines like:
"Left Alliance will fight sale of state assets 'to the death'"
will this have consequences in making followers and opponents more extreme in language and actions over the next few years?

I wonder, will the new ULA continue with these martyrdom-ish styled comments which have similarities to the Tea Party in America who used vitriolic comments in whipping up support and creating a more mob-style opposition, culminating with the shooting of a US senator and civilians. Only after this shooting was the language used by politicians examined and criticised for its violent imagery.

Whilst I have no problem with a strong opposition, is it right to use language that may inflame opinion and encourage/condone violent behaviour in resisting new legislation?

Sierra Oscar

I made the point after the General Election that various ULA deputies are intent on creating public unrest outside of the Dail Eireann - undermining the political system of the state.

Both Claire Daily & Joan Collins spoke to this effect on the Frontline and Vincent Browne after the election.

Chucky the tree

I think if they keep going down this path it could backfire on them. Whatever about wage cuts/job loses/welfare cuts I doubt people consider the sale of strategic assets as a huge issue so they might be a bit uneasy with their words. Not only that but the ULA can't do jack**** about it either. This style of talk might work in Greece were riots and protesting are far more common but Ireland is very lax about it so I think talk of deaths and violence will only worry and put off the electorate.

20Cent

Over my dead body is a common expression only the Indo would take it literally and make a headline fighting to the death. Hyperbole.

Manach

And as well, they've a legal absolute privelege to say what they want in the Dail (afaik).

20Cent

Could they get the names of the Anglo bondholders and read them out in the Dail under privilege?
Would like to see that!!

Pauleta

These people are a danger to democracy. They do not believe in democracy and wont rest until the country is run in an extremist far-left manner. They wont accept anything else.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Soldie

It sends a chill down my spine whenever I hear the hard left talk about public works programs; the White Sea Canal springs to mind.

Also, why is Joe Higgins wasting his and everyone else's time with this clumsy rant?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Einhard

Ah, nice to see the ULA expressing their commitment to the peoples' will by, eh, threatening to overthrow the democratic will by force...

The Waltzing Consumer

It's quite the sight

20Cent

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Why do you think he means violent overthrow of the state?

Listening to Shane Ross saying pretty much the same things right now.

Lay off the Glenn Beck lads.

Soldie

Shane Ross gets the first burn in!

Laminations

Soldie wrote: »

It sends a chill down my spine whenever I hear the hard left talk about public works programs; the White Sea Canal springs to mind.

Just like all of us in the middle get chills when either looney socialists or looney libertarians start talking about their wishes to demolish the state, and then have to listen to one side criticise the other for their rigid extremist ideology.

Shane Ross giving it welly now, echoing much of the rant of Higgins. Well at least his points can't be ridiculed through ad hominem attacks that he is a 'socialist'

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Sir Oxman

Nothing new at all. The ULA guys said before the election they would use their higher profiler to agitate for public protest against what was coming down the line.

The hyperbole is on the side of a few that would have liked to see the authors of Ireland's disaster returned 'as a strong opposition' whereas in fact they could only ever be supporters of what FG and Labour are going to do.
Now that's a joke.

I am look forward to seeing these new TDs challenge and harass this government, week in week out.

Soldie

Laminations wrote: »

Just like all of us in the middle get chills when either looney socialists or looney libertarians start talking about their wishes to demolish the state, and then have to listen to one side criticise the other for their rigid extremist ideology.

I see you haven't lost your remarkable ability to conjure up straw men out of thin air.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

amacachi

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Whereas the lowest 50% of workers pay loads of income tax eh? :pac:

amacachi

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Those bourgeois pigs with their ties.


Also, "eh."

Sierra Oscar

Richard Boyd Barret stating in the Dail that Eamon Gilmore should fear the people with placards.

GSF

If I was a German taxpayer, right now I'd be asking what planet these guys are living on?

Why should European taxpayers continue to pay for our lifestyles?

Einhard

gambiaman wrote: »

Nothing new at all. The ULA guys said before the election they would use their higher profiler to agitate for public protest against what was coming down the line.

The hyperbole is on the side of a few that would have liked to see the authors of Ireland's disaster returned 'as a strong opposition' whereas in fact they could only ever be supporters of what FG and Labour are going to do.
Now that's a joke.

I am look forward to seeing these new TDs challenge and harass this government, week in week out.

I have no problem with a stong socialist presence in the Dail, and I welcome any attempts of theirs to hold the government to account. Where I draw the line however, is the organising of campaigns of civil disobedience in response to measures proposed by an administration with a huge democratic mandate.

Shelga

Jesus 50% of Boyd Barrett's rant was "Eh eh eh...eh...eh"- I know he's probably nervous but it's so irritating when public speakers do that! Needless to say, the other 50% was nonsensical bellowing.

Monty Burnz

20Cent wrote: »

Why do you think he means violent overthrow of the state?

Listening to Shane Ross saying pretty much the same things right now.

Lay off the Glenn Beck lads.

Well, Joe and his friends believe that the dictatorship of the proletariat and revolution are inevitable. Revolutions of that nature are rarely peaceful. The formation of the USSR is a case in point.

karma_

This forum is completely obsessed with levelling any and all accusations at left wing politicians at every opportunity. It's actually quite pathetic.

CokaColumbo

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

I wonder, will the new ULA continue with these martyrdom-ish styled comments which have similarities to the Tea Party in America who used vitriolic comments in whipping up support and creating a more mob-style opposition, culminating with the shooting of a US senator and civilians. Only after this shooting was the language used by politicians examined and criticised for its violent imagery.

That is a completely ignorant view of the Gabrielle Giffords shooting. It had literally nothing to do with the Tea Party and excellently highlighted the bigotry of the left-wing media in the States. Also, vitriolic comments are made across the political spectrum in America.

I think the article is making something out of nothing. The socialists in the Dail, with their non-existent mandate from the people of Ireland, do not pose a credible threat to anybody. I for one support the privatisation of as many government owned companies as possible.

Sir Oxman

Einhard wrote: »

I have no problem with a stong socialist presence in the Dail, and I welcome any attempts of theirs to hold the government to account. Where I draw the line however, is the organising of campaigns of civil disobedience in response to measures proposed by an administration with a huge democratic mandate.

So, no-one can ever protest a govt decision or policy no matter how detrimental due to the size of the govt's majority in the Dail?

Laminations

Soldie wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Hmmm yeah sure, you don't have a rigid extreme ideology. And you dont want to demolish (read as heavily minimise) the state.

Permabear wrote: »

The libertarian will certainly agree that the government should employ and utilize a police force, since protecting life, liberty, and property is a legitimate function of the state. But the libertarian sees no rationale for why the state should be <doing the things it currently does>.

The hard right mocking the hard left and vice versa is like watching pots and kettles argue about colour. Keep prateing about that elephant lads

Monty Burnz

karma_ wrote: »

This forum is completely obsessed with levelling any and all accusations at left wing politicians at every opportunity. It's actually quite pathetic.

Odd that. Of course the communists never level any accusations at the rest of society at all, do they? :rolleyes:

Soldie

Ming wearing the same lucky shirt he wore when he was elected. :pac:

karma_

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Odd that. Of course the communists never level any accusations at the rest of society at all, do they? :rolleyes:

There are no communists that I'm aware of who post here.

mike65

Jesus Ming get a new speech!

Einhard

karma_ wrote: »

This forum is completely obsessed with levelling any and all accusations at left wing politicians at every opportunity. It's actually quite pathetic.

I think it's somewhat pathetic to be threatening to lead a campaign of civil disobedience and resistance when one has such a tiny mandate. Undemocratic too I might add. Claire Daly seems to think that the pensioners campaign to overturn the medical card reversals was somehow democratic. It was nothing of the sort. Organising a crowd to shout and scream, demand change, and block public thoroughfares, in order to have the decisions of a democratically elected government rescinded, is the very antithesis of democracy. As I've said before, I admire Higgins and Boyd Barrett to an extent, but they seem to only value democracy when the outcome is in accordance with their own values.

Monty Burnz

karma_ wrote: »

There are no communists that I'm aware of who post here.

I was speaking of Joe and his pals. I'm sure some communists do post here, incidentally.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

karma_

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I was speaking of Joe and his pals. I'm sure some communists do post here, incidentally.

It would be a good idea to check out the differences between a socialist and a communist before you actively participate on a politics forum.

Sir Oxman

Clothes certainly don't maketh the man, respect and passion and ideals do.
Well done Luke Flanagan.
Badly done, Mr ex-FF from Kerry.

CokaColumbo

Gotta love the sweat patches.

Monty Burnz

karma_ wrote: »

It would be a good idea to check out the differences between a socialist and a communist before you actively participate on a politics forum.

It would be good if you could demonstrate how you know for a fact that there are no communists who post here. But you won't, will you?

Soldie

Laminations wrote: »

Hmmm yeah sure, you don't have a rigid extreme ideology. And you dont want to demolish (read as heavily minimise) the state.

Why do you insist on dragging this thread off-topic? You took my post as an opportunity to try to insult me, but you merely displayed the same ignorance you did in the other thread in which we both posted some months ago.

Laminations

Ha, I've never seen Healy-Raes disgracefully bald head

karma_

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It would be good if you could demonstrate how you know for a fact that there are no communists who post here. But you won't, will you?

Maybe if you had a better understanding of the English language you would see in my post I made no such statement, I said there were none that I was aware of, which I am not. If you know of one then well done.

Einhard

gambiaman wrote: »

So, no-one can ever protest a govt decision or policy no matter how detrimental due to the size of the govt's majority in the Dail?

Of course such decisions can be protsted, but to seek to overturn them through mass protests and campaigns of civil disobedience is fundamentally undemocratic. Almost two million people voted in some form for Labour and FG- for an angry crowd of 50,000 to force the government to rescind a policy can hardly be called a triumph of the popular will. More like a subversion of it.

whatstherush

Laminations wrote: »

Ha, I've never seen Healy-Raes disgracefully bald head

Comb over of the year there

sceptre

karma and Money Burnz (both of you in particular), if you're not aware of the difference between on-topic and off-topic, or more especially posting ad hominem prattle and something useful, please sort that out before posting again.

/mod

amacachi

Ach, ya know, eh...

Laminations

Soldie wrote: »

Why do you insist on dragging this thread off-topic? You took my post as an opportunity to try to insult me, but you merely displayed the same ignorance you did in the other thread in which we both posted some months ago.

:rolleyes: Pot. Kettle

20Cent

Einhard wrote: »

Of course such decisions can be protsted, but to seek to overturn them through mass protests and campaigns of civil disobedience is fundamentally undemocratic. Almost two million people voted in some form for Labour and FG- for an angry crowd of 50,000 to force the government to rescind a policy can hardly be called a triumph of the popular will. More like a subversion of it.

An angry crowd can't rescind a policy.
Protest is still legal.