new political party?

KarmaBaby

Suryavarman wrote: »

Ireland has a fascist party?

It's not a registered party but it is a far right nationalist organisation that is likely to run in some local elections next year. I believe a couple of their members have already before with thankfully no success.

While they're not openly fascist, their forum which is easily viewable to anyone, contains a litany anti-Semitic, extremely racist and Nazi commentary as well as references to Main Kampf to back up racist opinions and support for Ankers Brivik.

Suryavarman wrote: »

What's the difference between a Maoist party and a Stalinist one?

Stalinism, is in reality not even a form a communism or marxism at all. It's about mass propaganda to establish the popularity of a single dictator.

Maoists would be closer to Marxist-Leninism but focussed on the peasantry as opposed to the urban proletariat as the main revolutionary force. There is also a greater emphasis on a mass movement of the majority of the population against the state. Maoism also involves using massive military powers to defend the state.

Suryavarman wrote: »

How does a party pretend to be socially left?

Almost all parties that are socially right of centre pretend to be much further to the left than they really are, especially during elections. These parties only move forward in terms of introducing new policies that create create greater equality in society when they must succumb to massive public pressure. For example: Fianna Fail and Fine Gael's previously adopted positions on gay rights compared to today.

Suryavarman

KarmaBaby wrote: »

It's not a registered party but it is a far right nationalist organisation that is likely to run in some local elections next year. I believe a couple of their members have already before with thankfully no success.

While they're not openly fascist, their forum which is easily viewable to anyone, contains a litany anti-Semitic, extremely racist and Nazi commentary as well as references to Main Kampf to back up racist opinions and support for Ankers Brivik.

I see, well I'll join with you in being thankful that they haven't been elected yet. Hopefully they won't be in the future either.

Stalinism, is in reality not even a form a communism or marxism at all. It's about mass propaganda to establish the popularity of a single dictator.

Maoists would be closer to Marxist-Leninism but focussed on the peasantry as opposed to the urban proletariat as the main revolutionary force. There is also a greater emphasis on a mass movement of the majority of the population against the state. Maoism also involves using massive military powers to defend the state.

In a democracy then, wouldn't both these philosophies really just be different election strategies? With one party emphasising the popularity of the party leader and the other targeting the rural vote. Or am I being over simplistic (or even completely getting it wrong!) here?

Almost all parties that are socially right of centre pretend to be much further to the left than they really are, especially during elections. These parties only move forward in terms of introducing new policies that create create greater equality in society when they must succumb to massive public pressure. For example: Fianna Fail and Fine Gael's previously adopted positions on gay rights compared to today.

Fair enough then. But what makes you think a libertarian party would be like that? And by socially left do you mean a party that proposes equal rights for everyone or a party that is generally socially liberal?

celtictiger32

KarmaBaby wrote: »

It's not a registered party but it is a far right nationalist organisation that is likely to run in some local elections next year. I believe a couple of their members have already before with thankfully no success.
.

is that that drm crowd that were in the news recently. i believe they were trying to form links with the bnp recently up the north and having sit downs with loyalists...... they'll go down well in ireland:rolleyes:

KarmaBaby

Suryavarman wrote: »

In a democracy then, wouldn't both these philosophies really just be different election strategies? With one party emphasising the popularity of the party leader and the other targeting the rural vote. Or am I being over simplistic (or even completely getting it wrong!) here?

Not really. It's all about how they use, delegate and in Stalin's case, hold on to their power. It's also about how the party operates internally. A stalinist party would tend to be extremely dogmatic and have a top heavy hierarchical structure.

Suryavarman wrote: »

Fair enough then. But what makes you think a libertarian party would be like that? And by socially left do you mean a party that proposes equal rights for everyone or a party that is generally socially liberal?

Hmmm... I guess you're right, it wouldn't necessarily have to be, but since such a party would inevitably end up with ever increasingly right leaning economic policies, those policies would inevitably create an unequal and very class-segregated society; not much different than what we have except perhaps proper separation of church and state, abortion and better gay rights.

KarmaBaby

celtictiger32 wrote: »

is that that drm crowd that were in the news recently. i believe they were trying to form links with the bnp recently up the north and having sit downs with loyalists...... they'll go down well in ireland:rolleyes:

They've re-branded. I didn't want to name them. I'd prefer to bring as little attention to them as possible.

celtictiger32

KarmaBaby wrote: »

They've re-branded. I didn't want to name them. I'd prefer to bring as little attention to them as possible.

if its the crowd i mentioned earlier they had a guy on a radio talk show the other night using the same group name thick as a brick he was....... pm me the new name if you can

RATM

boynesider wrote: »

There can be as many parties as you like, Ireland always has and always will elect a broadly centrist government. What matters to the majority of ordinary people when it comes to the polls is the individuals, not some ideological bent or radical shift in direction for the country.

This. Ireland never had a left-right divide and the average citizen on the street couldn't really explain fully what one is. Instead we had a civil war divide between FG-FF.

So now we vote on whoever fixed the road, not on idealogy.

RandomName2

We had two new parties at the last general election, another new party which contested the seaned alone, another new party which contested the european elections alone, another which contested the local elections alone.

New Vision, Fis Nua, Libertas, Senior Solidarity and... Democracy Ireland?

All did absolutely disastrously and have since pretty much disappeared.

It's not easy entering into Irish politics.

Sica

Left/Right ideological divides are largely irrelevant now. Most countries have seen traditional left/right divides melt away as everyone clambers in to the centre.

The real problem with Irish politics isn't a lack of ideology but a failure to think nationally. People tend to vote on local issues, not national ones and accordingly political parties in Ireland have no incentive to think and make policy on national lines. Instead political parties are collectives of local, personal political organisations linked to individual TDs.

If we want to change this we need to amend our constitutional set up by making local government stronger, taking road fixing and such away from the remit of TDs, and making constituencies larger, so TDs aren't rewarded for keeping a narrow focus on a relatively small local area and are instead encouraged to think nationally.

paddy0090

I think the gap left by the PDs will be filled (a party for smaller govt.) but seeing as right now every party is(or would be) cutting the size of the state they all are small govt. parties. Despite the protests about the austerity there's still plenty of people happy to see it happen, irrespective of the consequences. Vote for Chopper!

The interesting thing will be to see how the increased secularisation of the Irish public and the state affects existing parties and the landscape. I don't think the a la carte catholicism of the past two decades can last much longer. I think the country is a more socially liberal place than the law reflects and this trend will continue, giving rise to a new socially conservative party.

I don't really have an Idealogy but sympathise with Libertarians, and I'm deeply suspicious of any govt. intervention to help the market, since this help usually takes the form of digging out the status quo.

christmas2012

a political party that gets rid of quangos such as FAS which rob what could be a paid job from the unemployed masses

Eric Cartman

I would like to see a new political party that would

• Enforce strict immigration requirements
• clean up our heavily abused social welfare system and cut social welfare spending considerably
• decriminalize all drugs and save money on policing
• strictly uphold freedom of speech and internet neutrality
• remove regulations that hurt corporate opportunities or competitiveness and create a true free market.
• privatize and outsource as many services as possible
• remove and investment in semi state bodies and sell off the share NAMA has in our banks
• complete separation of church and state, especially in education
• remove the tax free status for religions
• make abortion to 12 weeks completely legal
• wind down pointless government lobby groups like SIMI, PSA, RSA etc...
• tougher sentencing for violent crime
• reduce the tax on fuel and abolish VRT
• a forced equal society in which no incentive programs, grants or quotas may be enforced to give any advantage to anybody from a minority group or gender
• a heavy belief in personal freedom and the right to do whatever you want along as it doesn't affect others

BOHtox

paddy0090 wrote: »

I think the gap left by the PDs will be filled (a party for smaller govt.) but seeing as right now every party is(or would be) cutting the size of the state they all are small govt. parties. Despite the protests about the austerity there's still plenty of people happy to see it happen, irrespective of the consequences. Vote for Chopper!

The interesting thing will be to see how the increased secularisation of the Irish public and the state affects existing parties and the landscape. I don't think the a la carte catholicism of the past two decades can last much longer. I think the country is a more socially liberal place than the law reflects and this trend will continue, giving rise to a new socially conservative party.

I don't really have an Idealogy but sympathise with Libertarians, and I'm deeply suspicious of any govt. intervention to help the market, since this help usually takes the form of digging out the status quo.

christmas2012 wrote: »

a political party that gets rid of quangos such as FAS which rob what could be a paid job from the unemployed masses

Fine Gael wanted to cut the size of the Oireachtas by 1/3 and get rid of 136 (I think) quangos including the HSE and FAS amongst others.

But no, people wanted a "balanced" government meaning the productivity now is miniscule compared to what it would have been.

Channel Zero

Eric Cartman wrote: »

I would like to see a new political party that would

• Enforce strict immigration requirements
• clean up our heavily abused social welfare system and cut social welfare spending considerably
• decriminalize all drugs and save money on policing
• strictly uphold freedom of speech and internet neutrality
• remove regulations that hurt corporate opportunities or competitiveness and create a true free market.
• privatize and outsource as many services as possible
• remove and investment in semi state bodies and sell off the share NAMA has in our banks
• complete separation of church and state, especially in education
• remove the tax free status for religions
• make abortion to 12 weeks completely legal
• wind down pointless government lobby groups like SIMI, PSA, RSA etc...
• tougher sentencing for violent crime
• reduce the tax on fuel and abolish VRT
• a forced equal society in which no incentive programs, grants or quotas may be enforced to give any advantage to anybody from a minority group or gender
• a heavy belief in personal freedom and the right to do whatever you want along as it doesn't affect others

Your last point is an absolute joke.

Channel Zero

Here is one of your contributions on after hours Eric:
"Libertarian capitalism entitles me to make as much money as i want, and not have to give any of it over to lazy greedy poor people who cant be arsed working , It means I dont have government interfering in descisions like only employing white men for management positions , It means I can own a gun and shoot dead anyone who attempts to break into my house without fear of prison. It means no government telling me what to do in whatever way and means I could keep nazi flags on my house (not because im racist , because its funny ) and have the media report to me exactly who did a crime and not have to come up with creative ways to tell you it was a foreigner. It also means getting rid of the dead weight in Ireland , foreigners coming in seeking dole , maybee I could wander through henry street and every conversation I overhear would be in english again , like it used to be.

Thats how it should be , and thats why socialism is bad , any even minor injection of socialism turns into totalitarian control, just look at that lad arrested in the UK for saying things on facebook , that is the control required for even partial socialism gone too far"

Hmm. A bit dodgy mate.

BOHtox

Channel Zero wrote: »

Your last point is an absolute joke.

I personally wouldn't call liberty a "joke"!

Channel Zero

BOHtox wrote: »

I personally wouldn't call liberty a "joke"!

It's a joke when it's subverted as a rhetorical device for peurile libertarianism. .

BOHtox

Channel Zero wrote: »

It's a joke when it's subverted as a rhetorical device for peurile libertarianism. .

He doesn't do that. He lists a number of policies and that is the final one

Channel Zero

BOHtox wrote: »

He doesn't do that. He lists a number of policies and that is the final one

He actually did do that. It's just that you don't feel happy about admitting it as it's probably ideologically disturbing to you.

BOHtox

Channel Zero wrote: »

He actually did do that. It's just that you don't feel happy about admitting it as it's probably ideologically disturbing to you.

You're the one calling it "a joke". I'd call myself a Libertarian

Channel Zero

BOHtox wrote: »

You're the one calling it "a joke". I'd call myself a Libertarian

Ireland needs libertarianism like it needs a hole in the head. Libertarianism died in 2008. It was a painful death that we're all suffering.

BOHtox

Channel Zero wrote: »

Ireland needs libertarianism like it needs a hole in the head. Libertarianism died in 2008. It was a painful death that we're all suffering.

Thousands of threads about Libertarianism. Not need hijacking this one tbh.

Channel Zero

BOHtox wrote: »

Thousands of threads about Libertarianism. Not needc hijacking this one tbh.

Don't make me laugh. Just look at this thread!
Libertarians chip in in just about every thread on here with the express purpose of shoving their extremist ideology down our throats. It's like having a few Leninists in our midst constantly saying that all private property is theft.
What an absolute joke.

Libertarian is a long way from being in Irish political lexicon, no matter how ubiquitous their followers are.

K-9

Take it to pm lads if you want to post like that, rather than ruin the thread.

Endless Nameless

Channel Zero wrote: »

Ireland needs libertarianism like it needs a hole in the head. Libertarianism died in 2008. It was a painful death that we're all suffering.

It's been growing considrably since then.
The US libertarian party is their fastest-growing at the moment I believe.

They'll will probably see a huge grow in support this general election as their candidate will likely be gary johnson, their biggest name in years.

And dont forget good ole ron paul, whose going to win absolutely everything ever.

Then in a few years Rand (his son) will get more prominent, I can see it being a huge player over the next decade, dividing the republican party with the neo-cons

expect a lot of run-off into western europe, canada, australia and new zealand

Noobsaibot21

The only Libertarians I know of are UKIP and Ron Paul. And I happen to agree with a hell of a lot about what ukip stand for. Their leader, Nigel Farage, is a superb speaker who knows what he's talking about. Have a look at this vid - He seems to be right about almost everything and I've never heard anyone stand up and hit the nail on the head about what happened to this country:

Never even heard any of our own politicians say anything like this.

So, why is Libertarian dead? And why is that other person refusing to give the name of that nazi party? Are they afraid I might be too stupid to see a bunch of scrote nazis and that I might accidentally vote for them?

Channel Zero

Endless Nameless wrote: »

It's been growing considrably since then.
The US libertarian party is their fastest-growing at the moment I believe.

Sorry. When i said "Libertarianism died in 2008", i didn't intend for it to be taken literally. I meant it in the sense that it was the financial policies of libertarianism that borked the world economy, so now they are moving away from complete financial de-regulation, hopefully never to return.

Right-Libertarianism is of course alive and well in the U.S., as there will always be rich people there who want to keep all the wealth for themselves, and they need to use the ideology to make themselves feel better about that fact. Eric Cartman summed it up beautifully above.

And dont forget good ole ron paul, whose going to win absolutely everything ever.

I very much doubt that.

Then in a few years Rand (his son) will get more prominent, I can see it being a huge player over the next decade

I doubt that either, but i grant you, Rand Paul and the Tea Party seem to be quite prominent already, mostly thanks to the Koch brothers' propaganda machine
No offence to you, but many many people in the U.S. think he's a puppet and a moron, and for very good reason IMO.

In relation to the OP, judging by Francois Hollande's victory yesterday, it seems voters here in Europe are in favour of moving things in the opposite direction, ie towards a stronger social democratic model, strong financial regulation, public education and healthcare, and increased equality.

BOHtox

Channel Zero wrote: »

In relation to the OP, judging by Francois Hollande's victory yesterday, it seems voters here in Europe are in favour of moving things in the opposite direction, ie towards a stronger social democratic model, strong financial regulation, public education and healthcare, and increased equality.

Yeah, it sounds great doesn't it?

But then taxes increase and deficits increase and borrowing costs increase and as Mrs Thatcher said you "eventually run out of other people's money"

fianna saor

we need a party that has strong belief in our own country and not pander to the europhiles. we must be the only country where a show of patriotism is bludgeoned, we have listened to the mainstream political parties for too long i would even say this has given us an inferiority complex among our national peers

sarumite

Noobsaibot21 wrote: »

Their leader, Nigel Farage, is a superb speaker who knows what he's talking about. Have a look at this vid - He seems to be right about almost everything and I've never heard anyone stand up and hit the nail on the head about what happened to this country:

I watched all of it, not exactly sure what it supposed to prove. He made some observations, the odd quip, a few jabs at other european politicians. For 3 minutes and 11 seconds he said very little of substance. Great delivery mind you, although personally I prefer substance over style.