A right wing party

digzy

Hi Lads,

Just reading some of the various threads here there seems a fair proportion of the posters who're fed up with successive government's inability to tackle public spending especially in relation to welfare and public sector pay.

There's a number of left of centre and more radical left wing groups. However, bar fine gael, who're supposedly a right of centre party, there appears to be a 'vacaum' of political options to the right. Indeed i'd challenge anyone to point out significant differences between them and fianna fail!

So, to my question. any theories on why we dont have a viable 'conservative' 'right wing' party

(I'm not referring to a nazi type party. just one to offer a reasonable alternative)

boundlessSea

I think there is probably not many votes free to be taken on the right with Fine Gael and Fianna Fail dominating the Irish political landscape. They might not be conservative enough for a minority, but this minority would probably be too small to sustain a party large enough to achieve real change in Ireland.

All of the groups left of Labour are protest groups with no relevance, it would be pointless to setup right wing group of similar nature, maybe people on the left are more into protest or idealist politics than people on the right who would not go into politics without the expectation of eventually getting power.

COYW

boundlessSea wrote: »

I think there is probably not many votes free to be taken on the right with Fine Gael and Fianna Fail dominating the Irish political landscape. They might not be conservative enough for a minority, but this minority would probably be too small to sustain a party large enough to achieve real change in Ireland.

All of the groups left of Labour are protest groups with no relevance, it would be pointless to setup right wing group of similar nature, maybe people on the left are more into protest or idealist politics than people on the right who would not go into politics without the expectation of eventually getting power.

Firstly, as someone who is economically to the right, I would like to add that FF are most definitely not to the right and never have been. FG are centre-right but nothing more. If we had a truly right wing party in government during the Celtic tiger or even now, we would not be in the mess we are in.

Anyway, as you stated correctly, a right wing party would only enter politics if there was a distinct possibility of power. The hard lefties, people before profit, SF etc are happy to live in their idealistic world, work the protest circuit hard and cost the taxpayers €90,000 plus expenses with no real possibility of power. A stint in power would be a disaster from them, as it would mean that they would have to face reality; Labour is a classic example of this.

Francie Barrett

It's called Fine Gael, and yes, we are doing a good job keeping Labour in check.

Gloomtastic!

Francie Barrett wrote: »

It's called Fine Gael, and yes, we are doing a good job keeping Labour in check.

Tell that to Jack O'Connor. Laughing all the way to the bank, at 'our' expense of course.

Francie Barrett

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

Tell that to Jack O'Connor. Laughing all the way to the bank, at 'our' expense of course.

If we had been given a majority, we would have been able to deal much more effectively with the unions. As it stands, we didn't get the mandate, so we're doing what we can (with a decent degree of success).

Manach

I'd presume right-wing would seem both socially and economically conservative - akin to the current US Republicans or the previous generation of the UK Conservatives?

Gloomtastic!

Francie Barrett wrote: »

we're doing what we can (with a decent degree of success).

Success for who? Success for all those politicians and civil servants who have retired on gold-plated pensions that are a multiple of what other countries pay. Lots of talk, of course, but no action.
Success for all the TDs that were re-elected at the last election, you managed to hold on to your gold-plated pensions as well, unlike new TDs.
Success for all in the Dail who managed to get away with a 3% reduction in expenditure over three years - 1% a year.
Yes, you've been very successful looking after yourselves, as always.

StillWaters

COYW wrote: »

If we had a truly right wing party in government during the Celtic tiger or even now, we would not be in the mess we are in.

Eh.... Progressive Democrats

COYW

StillWaters wrote: »

Eh.... Progressive Democrats

Erm, a tiny part of a FF government which blindly pumped into our economic black holes, health etc. Not my idea of right wing.

RichardAnd

I'll just throw something into the mix here.

The words 'Conservative' and 'right wing' are not synonymous and certainly, they do not go hand in hand. Though many who would consider themselves to be conservative also espouse typically right wing views, this is not a rule as I have encountered a huge number of liberally minded people who are extremely right wing.

Liberals like people to be responsible for themselves and as such, things like welfare, pensions and publicly provided services are not something that philosophy approves of. In fact, welfare is often like kryptonite to some liberals.

On the other hand, conservatives tend to approve of a powerful state that overlooks the lives of its citizens. To that end, the idea of welfare and an abundance of public services is something many conservatives would believe in.

Anyway, all of the above is just an exercise in political science. In truth, there are no real liberal or conservatives because very few people do anything out of belief. In the majority of cases, people will support any ideal from which they stand to gain. In other words, the only real "ism" is mé-féin-ism.

mikom

Francie Barrett wrote: »

Exactly, a few hardcore lefties getting together outside Leinster House won't accomplish anything.

Anyway, this will all have blown over in a week or two.

I wonder where this posters allegiances lie?

Francie Barrett wrote: »

It's called Fine Gael, and yes, we are doing a good job keeping Labour in check.

Oh, right.........

The Corinthian

digzy wrote: »

So, to my question. any theories on why we dont have a viable 'conservative' 'right wing' party

We don't really do the whole left versus right wing thing in Ireland. Instead, we've been doing Guelphs versus Ghibellines politics since we got independence.

Colonel Sanders

The Corinthian wrote: »

We don't really do the whole left versus right wing thing in Ireland

Nope, huge race to the centre

Populism wins votes in Ireland

rumour

digzy wrote: »

Hi Lads,

Just reading some of the various threads here there seems a fair proportion of the posters who're fed up with successive government's inability to tackle public spending especially in relation to welfare and public sector pay.

There's a number of left of centre and more radical left wing groups. However, bar fine gael, who're supposedly a right of centre party, there appears to be a 'vacaum' of political options to the right. Indeed i'd challenge anyone to point out significant differences between them and fianna fail!

So, to my question. any theories on why we dont have a viable 'conservative' 'right wing' party

(I'm not referring to a nazi type party. just one to offer a reasonable alternative)

Are yo checking out opinions on a state salary from one of our institutionally recognized parties?

Seriously your OP really appears that way.

Scofflaw

Colonel Sanders wrote: »

Nope, huge race to the centre

Populism wins votes in Ireland

The centre wins in nearly all elections - both the left and the right in other countries have to appeal to the centre to win. When they forget that, they lose.

As to why we don't have a right-wing party, the answer is most probably that while there are a number of votes available for such a party, they're not concentrated in any constituency, and don't seem to be a big vote overall either. For the last decade I've watched right wing people claim to be "the silent majority", but all the evidence says that they're actually a vocal minority.

cordially,
Scofflaw

The Corinthian

Scofflaw wrote: »

The centre wins in nearly all elections - both the left and the right in other countries have to appeal to the centre to win. When they forget that, they lose.

Left and right wing politics was largely a twentieth century phenomenon. Right wing parties lost credibility with the collapse of Fascism after World War II and left wing parties lost credibility with the fall of Communism 45 years later. There's an expression, possibly a quote, I remember; "one night in 1943, Italy went to bed Fascist and woke up, the next morning, Christian Democrat" - a lot of hard-line socialists and communists did much the same, around the World, in the early nineties, waking up social democrats instead.

However, in-between 1945 and 1992, you still saw in most Western European countries very distinct ideological differences between centre-right Christian Democrats and left-wing socialist or communist parties, many of whom looked to Moscow for inspiration. When the USSR finally collapsed, many of them 'reformed' and moved to the centre, adopting a softer social democratic position, eventually going as far as New Labour did - becoming Thatcherism Lite - a far cry from Michael Foot's Labour party a decade earlier.

Ireland though was different. It historically never really took to the far left or right all that much - you never saw serious political parties with hammers and sickles running for election in the seventies and eighties, instead the ideological battle revolved more around conservative Catholic tradition versus a liberal cosmopolitan (i.e. foreign) one. This is why Irish politics always struck me as being more closely related to the late-medieval politics of Guelphs and Ghibellines.

As a result, both 'hard' right and left parties are out of fashion in most of Europe and here they were never in fashion, typically getting a tiny percentage of the vote, except for times of crisis (which we're getting at present - hence Jobbik in Hungary, Movimento 5 Stelle in Italy and Golden Dawn and SYRIZA in Greece).

That one is even asking why we don't have a 'right' wing party is probably related to the ongoing economic crisis in Ireland - otherwise we probably wouldn't even care.

Gloomtastic!

Scofflaw wrote: »

The centre wins in nearly all elections - both the left and the right in other countries have to appeal to the centre to win. When they forget that, they lose.

As to why we don't have a right-wing party, the answer is most probably that while there are a number of votes available for such a party, they're not concentrated in any constituency, and don't seem to be a big vote overall either. For the last decade I've watched right wing people claim to be "the silent majority", but all the evidence says that they're actually a vocal minority.

cordially,
Scofflaw

I am one of those 'vocal minorities' you speak of. Why am I in the minority when I believe that a country that is being held to ransom by unelected trade unionists and representative bodies, is a country going nowhere - especially one that is bankrupt?

Can the majority not see that? Why not? Are they so stupid to believe 'ah shure it'll be grand'? They're wrong 100%!!!

Yesterday's OECD figures showing Irish secondary teachers working 700-odd hours a year v the European average of 1300. Teachers that are the third highest paid in the OECD, working nearly half of what their colleagues in countries that are not bankrupt. Can the majority not see what's wrong here?

It's wrong, so bloody wrong and it makes me so bloody angry!!!

Scofflaw

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

I am one of those vocal minorities you s

Well done you - by the way, I can't think of many nice words there beginning with "s", is that deliberate?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Gloomtastic!

Scofflaw wrote: »

Well done you - by the way, I can't think of many nice words there beginning with "s", is that deliberate?

cordially,
Scofflaw

Let's try that again shall we! (Bloody big thumbs and little keyboards)

The Corinthian

Scofflaw wrote: »

I can't think of many nice words there beginning with "s"

Sweetie? Sugarpumb? Schatzi?

Scofflaw

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

I am one of those 'vocal minorities' you speak of. Why am I in the minority when I believe that a country that is being held to ransom by unelected trade unionists and representative bodies, is a country going nowhere - especially one that is bankrupt?

Can the majority not see that? Why not? Are they so stupid to believe 'ah shure it'll be grand'? They're wrong 100%!!!

Yesterday's OECD figures showing Irish secondary teachers working 700-odd hours a year v the European average of 1300. Teachers that are the third highest paid in the OECD, working nearly half of what their colleagues in countries that are not bankrupt. Can the majority not see what's wrong here?

It's wrong, so bloody wrong and it makes me so bloody angry!!!

The thing is, I suppose, that while a good number of people probably agree to a greater or lesser extent that the country is "being held to ransom by unelected trade unionists and representative bodies", they are almost invariably thinking of the "unelected trade unionists and representative bodies" who don't represent them.

In a sense, that sounds awful - and one can certainly get worked up on the basis of "people looking out for their self-interests and failing to see the bigger picture" - but, vitally, the point is that those "unelected trade unionists and representative bodies" actually do between them represent a large proportion of the electorate, at least as far as I can see.

There are people who are left out of the whole corporatist arrangements of the Irish State, but that's always gong to be the case - and some who are left out don't care, while others consist of multiple small disparate groups who are simply too small to make a difference. If they become large enough to be meaningful, the corporatist structure will find room for them.

So, there's a possible analysis - people may bitch about the other bodies representing particular interests, but only because they're competing with the body representing their interests, while overall, a sufficiently broad representation is achieved to maintain political stability and prevent the growth of more agenda-driven political parties.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Scofflaw

The Corinthian wrote: »

Sweetie? Sugarpumb? Schatzi?

They're endearments, certainly, but I wouldn't consider them nice. Anyway, all happily resolved now!

cordially,
Scofflaw

murphaph

Manach wrote: »

I'd presume right-wing would seem both socially and economically conservative - akin to the current US Republicans or the previous generation of the UK Conservatives?

Wouldn't have to be. The FDP in Germany is economically conservative and socially liberal.

We had the PD's though, who would have been close to the FDP (in theory) but once they "got in" with FF they seemed to throw economic conservatism out the window and were happy enough to buy elections with Bertie and his giveaway manifestos.

If the PD's had remained true to their principles, I would vote for them. They might even still exist!

I'm not allowed to vote in German elections (apart from local elections) but I'd vote FDP if I could.

Plastic Sheeting

The op is spot on. The countries a socialist paradise. The government gives handouts left right and centre. It's as though it's a right of passage to be on welfare these days. Welfare has poisoned Irish society and should be severely cut back.

Immigration should also be tackled. what business has an immigrant on welfare being here when his sole incentive to be in the country is to work?

There's been a bunch of incompetents running the country for the last couple of years and the anglo tapes are a good example of this.

The place is a mess.

And why have we a 10,000 strong army when there only duty is to escort Securicor vans around the country? They should be put to work and made use of in NATO.

Gloomtastic!

Scofflaw wrote: »

The thing is, I suppose, that while a good number of people probably agree to a greater or lesser extent that the country is "being held to ransom by unelected trade unionists and representative bodies", they are almost invariably thinking of the "unelected trade unionists and representative bodies" who don't represent them.

In a sense, that sounds awful - and one can certainly get worked up on the basis of "people looking out for their self-interests and failing to see the bigger picture" - but, vitally, the point is that those "unelected trade unionists and representative bodies" actually do between them represent a large proportion of the electorate, at least as far as I can see.

There are people who are left out of the whole corporatist arrangements of the Irish State, but that's always gong to be the case - and some who are left out don't care, while others consist of multiple small disparate groups who are simply too small to make a difference. If they become large enough to be meaningful, the corporatist structure will find room for them.

So, there's a possible analysis - people may bitch about the other bodies representing particular interests, but only because they're competing with the body representing their interests, while overall, a sufficiently broad representation is achieved to maintain political stability and prevent the growth of more agenda-driven political parties.

cordially,
Scofflaw

580,000 trade union members out of a total 2,500,000 voting population. Why is a fifth allowed to dictate terms to the real majority?

I believe that the way the country is now, the real majority need to be shown the facts - like the teachers above - in black and white and repeated to them over and over again - just like they do in primary school!!!

Am I wrong?

Edit: forgot about the unemployed - 400,000. The pensioners - 600,000. Christ that's the majority of self-interested people!!! The country's ****ed! That's for sure!!!

Scofflaw

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

580,000 trade union members out of a total 2,500,000 voting population. Why is a fifth allowed to dictate terms to the real majority?

I believe that the way the country is now, the real majority need to be shown the facts - like the teachers above - in black and white and repeated to them over and over again - just like they do in primary school!!!

Am I wrong?

580,000 trade union members out of a voting population of 2.5m - how many family members is that? How many halves of households? And what proportion of trade union members vote as against the proportion of the general public that vote?

Plus, that leaves out other representative bodies. Have a look at the full list of "social partners" at the bottom of this page, and see what you reckon the coverage of the population - in particular the politically concerned population - that gives.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Gloomtastic!

Scofflaw wrote: »

580,000 trade union members out of a voting population of 2.5m - how many family members is that? How many halves of households? And what proportion of trade union members vote as against the proportion of the general public that vote?

Plus, that leaves out other representative bodies. Have a look at the full list of "social partners" at the bottom of this page, and see what you reckon the coverage of the population - in particular the politically concerned population - that gives.

cordially,
Scofflaw

That's a long list! Whoever came up with Social Partnership (Bertie?) was looking to include everyone it seems - a real vote winner but probably the beginning of the end for this country.
As Dermot Desmond likes to quote 'The majority is never right'. He's not wrong......

Scofflaw

Gloomtastic! wrote: »

That's a long list! Whoever came up with Social Partnership (Bertie?) was looking to include everyone it seems - a real vote winner but probably the beginning of the end for this country.
As Dermot Desmond likes to quote 'The majority is never right'. He's not wrong......

The problem, though, is that in terms of "right governance" in a democratic country, the majority is right (barring legal protections for the rights of minorities etc).

The social partnership in this country doesn't cover everyone, but it probably does cover the greater majority, whereas the elected government actually rather better represents a plurality. That's a major reason for the system's ability to resist alternative politics.

cordially,
Scofflaw

laoch na mona

why would anyone want a new right wing party FG are bad enough

Gloomtastic!

laoch na mona wrote: »

why would anyone want a new right wing party FG are bad enough

Because someone has to try and stop this country spending money that we're having to borrow. We can't afford to have some the highest paid unemployed, PS, politicians or pensioners anywhere in the developed world.
FG are a bunch of spineless do nothings. They had the mandate to so something to help sort the country out when they were first elected but bottled it.