As A Young Adult, Do You Feel Your Views Are Represented In Ireland?

V4Voluntary

As a young person in Ireland, it seems to me that anyone with Liberal views are to be met with suspicion. Anyone that doesn't "fall in line" are alienated and isolated. Up and down the country I see a total disconnect between the old civil war parties and the new generation. I don't think it has dawned on the establishment status quo in this country that young people don't give a fiddler about what happened nearly 100 years ago, who said what, when, where and how. All we want are new ideas and proposals about how we can secure and live a successful and fulfilling life for ourselves and our future families. We want solutions for the future, not the past. We want to look forward, not back.

At a time when the American youth identify more and more with libertarian views and when the British youth start leaning more towards a position where they want government out of their pockets and out of their bedrooms, it seems our politicians are just happy to sit around and wait for the world to do something before even considering it here. Why are our parties so static and not pro-active? How are our politicians so out of touch with young people? There is no vision, no ideas.

Does anyone else believe their views are not represented in this country? Do you think there is a "niche in the market" for new ideas? A new party that will represent young people? A party that won't throw an adult in prison for smoking a leaf in the privacy of their own homes? A party that doesn't care what two homosexual men or women do in privacy of their own bedrooms? A party that doesn't tax the hell out of someone trying to make ends meet? A party that doesn't discourage a woman from engaging in activities that they deem morally wrong? A party that doesn't pander to religious organisations or grant them a monopoly over our education system which should be secular? A party that doesn't seek centralised power in the "old boys club"? A party that will return liberties, economic and social freedom back to the people? A party that rejects government interference in the economic, social and political lives of citizens?

The Backwards Man

At 35, am I still considered a young adult?

Sir Humphrey Appleby

V4Voluntary wrote: »

As a young person in Ireland, it seems to me that anyone with Liberal views are to be met with suspicion. Anyone that doesn't "fall in line" are alienated and isolated. Up and down the country I see a total disconnect between the old civil war parties and the new generation. I don't think it has dawned on the establishment status quo in this country that young people don't give a fiddler about what happened nearly 100 years ago, who said what, when, where and how. All we want are new ideas and proposals about how we can secure and live a successful and fulfilling life for ourselves and our future families. We want solutions for the future, not the past. We want to look forward, not back.

At a time when the American youth identify more and more with libertarian views and when the British youth start leaning more towards a position where they want government out of their pockets and out of their bedrooms, it seems our politicians are just happy to sit around and wait for the world to do something before even considering it here. Why are our parties so static and not pro-active? How are our politicians so out of touch with young people? There is no vision, no ideas.

Does anyone else believe their views are not represented in this country? Do you think there is a "niche in the market" for new ideas? A new party that will represent young people? A party that won't throw an adult in prison for smoking a leaf in the privacy of their own homes? A party that doesn't care what two homosexual men or women do in privacy of their own bedrooms? A party that doesn't tax the hell out of someone trying to make ends meet? A party that doesn't discourage a woman from engaging in activities that they deem morally wrong? A party that doesn't pander to religious organisations or grant them a monopoly over our education system which should be secular? A party that doesn't seek centralised power in the "old boys club"? A party that will return liberties, economic and social freedom back to the people? A party that rejects government interference in the economic, social and political lives of citizens?

A sad,naive, and polotically immature post.
If this is the youth of Ireland then God help us all!

Kylo Ren

The Backwards Man wrote: »

At 35, am I still considered a young adult?

No.

V4Voluntary

Old and grey wrote: »

A sad,naive, and polotically immature post.
If this is the youth of Ireland then God help us all!

Any chance of expanding on that non-answer?

Washington Irving

Thread title and poll asking opposite questions is going to result in people accidentally choosing the wrong option.

The Backwards Man

Keno 92 wrote: »

No.

Balls.:(

V4Voluntary

The Backwards Man wrote: »

At 35, am I still considered a young adult?

That depends entirely on whether or not you're satisfied with the way the country is going.

efb

If 35 is a no, I guess 33 is pushing it.

Young people these days, heads in the clouds

Sir Humphrey Appleby

V4Voluntary wrote: »

Any chance of expanding on that non-answer?

Your post read,in my opinion, rather childish and politically naive.
Your claims are highly inaccurate since of the the 6 Parties or Political groupings in Dail Eireann (FG,Lab,SF,SWP,ULA,PBP) only two are "Civil War" Parties, and at least four of the 6 would claim to be socially liberal. At least 4 of the parties represented in Dail have strong youth movements with them, Labour Youth,Ogra Fianna Fail,Young Fine Gael, and Ogra Sinn Fein, you did know that I presume.
Happy now?
PS I note that your poll disregarded three of the most active and socially liberal groups in the Dail, and the three with the youngest average age of TD..SF/ULA/PBP!

Old and grey

Old and grey wrote: »

in fact it makes you appear like a spoilt brat having a tantrum.

Mod

Dial it back on attacking the poster please.

V4Voluntary

Old and grey wrote: »

Your post was and is childish and politically naive, in fact it makes you appear like a spoilt brat having a tantrum.
Your claims are highly inaccurate since of the the 6 Parties or Political groupings in Dail Eireann (FG,Lab,SF,SWP,ULA,PBP) only two are "Civil War" Parties, and at least four of the 6 at least would claim to be socially liberal. At least 4 of the parties represented in Dail have strong youth movements with them, Labour Youth,Ogra Fianna Fail,Young Fine Gael, and Ogra Sinn Fein, you did know that I presume.
Happy now?

I think you're naive. You're the only one that thinks I referred to every party in Dail Eireann as a civil war party. Everyone else knows damn well that I was specifying Fine Gael and Fianna Fail as they're the two establishment parties that have dominated Irish politics for decades.

In addition, SF and the other parties with socialist leanings is something I was NOT speaking of. I am specifying a socially liberal (yes, even more socially liberal than the present parties) and a fiscally conservative one.

If you want to see someone with little knowledge of politics and economics, you should look closer to home.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

Deleted User wrote: »

Mod

Dial it back on attacking the poster please.

Apologies. Badly phrased.

PizzamanIRL

The Backwards Man wrote: »

At 35, am I still considered a young adult?

Should be in the nursing home by now.

I wouldn't trust a political party to tell me the time, much less expect them to represent my views.

The Backwards Man

PizzamanIRL wrote: »

Should be in the nursing home by now.

I'm not that desperate for a wife yet.:pac:

Gran Hermano

Have i wandered into C&H or is the OP just an ageist generalisation on who uses Boards?

shruikan2553

A new political party that isnt full of incompetent idiots and can lead a country would be great but I dont think that is exclusive to what young adults want.

wonderfulname

I think labour would actually suit your political views very well OP, it's more our political system than parties that need addressing.

V4Voluntary

wonderfulname wrote: »

I think labour would actually suit your political views very well OP, it's more our political system than parties that need addressing.

I wouldn't touch Labour with a bargepole.

Labour are in bed with the unions. No thanks.

Mike 1972

The Backwards Man wrote: »

At 35, am I still considered a young adult?

It depends on wheher you have a mortgage

The Backwards Man

Mike 1972 wrote: »

It depends on wheher you have a mortgage

Not any more.:p

Mully_2011

No, The views of the people are not represented and this is because of a number of reasons.

Reason one : The type of people who enter politics in this country are usually the local do gooder who only run for election to benefit themselves not that of the constituents.

Reason Two : Voter turnout.Typically it is the older generation that tends to have the higher voter turnout

Reason three: The Parish pump He fixed the roads so the same do gooders retain there seats.

Reason Four: The endless cycle of Fianna Fail/Fine Geal as the main party in power.

TheBegotten

The vast majority of election candidates are either power hungry family politicians (generally FF/FG/right); naive and/or extreme idealists (SF/PBP/ULA/left) or Wishy-Washy types who abandon their election lines as soon as they get into power (Greens/Labour/some independents). The people I tend to look for are those who would normally be doing something else but enter politics to resolve an issue. The first - albeit far from best - example to occur to me would be Dr James Reilly, a qualified medical doctor who entered politics for...well to cut the health budget, but I'm sure he had the 'best intentions' at the time :rolleyes:

P.S: Interesting vote tally...OP, should a new party be formed to listen to "new ideas and young peoples' views", what line do you propose they pull? Young people's opinions are as varied as those of any other age group...

Jimoslimos

V4Voluntary wrote: »

I am specifying a socially liberal (yes, even more socially liberal than the present parties) and a fiscally conservative one.

No, no, no, no, no. Stop beating around the bush and admit your Libertarian leanings. If ever there were a crowd of nutjobs crazier than the fringe parties we currently have in DÉ.

TheBegotten wrote: »

The people I tend to look for are those who would normally be doing something else but enter politics to resolve an issue. The first - albeit far from best - example to occur to me would be Dr James Reilly, a qualified medical doctor who entered politics for...well to cut the health budget, but I'm sure he had the 'best intentions' at the time :rolleyes:

Take it from someone in his constituency, James Reilly is far from someone who entered politics for the "best intentions" (unless those intentions were his own). He's always been career-minded.

Derpington95

V4Voluntary wrote: »

A party that doesn't care what two homosexual men or women do in privacy of their own bedrooms? A party that doesn't tax the hell out of someone trying to make ends meet?
A party that doesn't discourage a woman from engaging in activities that they deem morally wrong? A party that doesn't pander to religious organisations or grant them a monopoly over our education system which should be secular?
A party that doesn't seek centralised power in the "old boys club"? A party that will return liberties, economic and social freedom back to the people? A party that rejects government interference in the economic, social and political lives of citizens?

Keep dreaming buddy.

V4Voluntary

Jimoslimos wrote: »

No, no, no, no, no. Stop beating around the bush and admit your Libertarian leanings. If ever there were a crowd of nutjobs crazier than the fringe parties we currently have in DÉ.

Take it from someone in his constituency, James Reilly is far from someone who entered politics for the "best intentions" (unless those intentions were his own). He's always been career-minded.

I've no problem saying I've libertarian leanings....what about it?

miss flutter ups

What's wrong with (being young) and "giving a fiddler what happened nearly 100 years ago"?

I don't know why you're equating that with being less liberal.

1ZRed

I think this country is far too conservative and slow to move with the times. Young people today are a world away from many of the politicians in the way in which we see and approach issues.

Far too many politicians hang onto their religious and conservative views and are reluctant to accept change.

FloatingVoter

I'm 38 and you young people are whats wrong with this country. Lazy good for nothings.

Enjoying letting my inner old fart out.

Staff Infection

Hard to do. If people enter in politics specifically addressing the issues of young people they only have one niche (who don't turn out in big numbers) to appeal to for votes to get elected in the first place. Also when these young people get old why would they continue to vote for the "young persons party" as it wouldn't be addressing their older issues and would instead be trying to appeal to the new young people and their issues.

I do think though that there is room for a new party which as you say would be quite socially liberal while being also being fiscally conservative. However, a party like this would have to appeal to all age groups as focusing on just young people would make getting elected in the first place difficult.

goose2005

Staff Infection wrote: »

Hard to do. If people enter in politics specifically addressing the issues of young people they only have one niche (who don't turn out in big numbers) to appeal to for votes to get elected in the first place.

Which means that there are votes there to be won if the youth can be encouraged to come out and vote.

Also when these young people get old why would they continue to vote for the "young persons party" as it wouldn't be addressing their older issues and would instead be trying to appeal to the new young people and their issues.

That's a matter for decades in the future surely, presumably a Youth party founded in 2013 would have evolved by 2033

1ZRed

FloatingVoter wrote: »

I'm 38 and you young people are whats wrong with this country. Lazy good for nothings.

Enjoying letting my inner old fart out.

Every single generation will say that about the next.

Staff Infection

goose2005 wrote: »

Which means that there are votes there to be won if the youth can be encouraged to come out and vote.

That's a matter for decades in the future surely, presumably a Youth party founded in 2013 would have evolved by 2033

Well I presume that's why many parties have a youth branch, to specifically try and tap into the youth vote. However, apart from Obama in the US I can't remember any politician actually managing to get a big number of young people out to vote. There just isn't enough young people engaged in politics (I'm 22 by the way). Now that may change if a party specifically looked at youth issues but equally it may not and they waste alot of money trying. As a result appealing to a wider range of voters is a safer bet.

Yeah I know the party would evolve but they'd have to choose between developing into a party which looks after middle-aged people (their young voters who aged) or alienate them from those who voted for them in the past by focusing on young peoples issues.

jimmycrackcorm

But op, your views are being represented by one TD in the Dail. You just need a party of Mings.

oppenheimer1

Winston Churchill wrote:

“Show me a young Conservative and I'll show you someone with no heart. Show me an old Liberal and I'll show you someone with no brains.”

I think the OP has made the mistake in assuming that all young people have the same views as him.

NuckingFacker

Old and grey wrote: »

A sad,naive, and polotically immature post.
If this is the youth of Ireland then God help us all!

I'd chukka bit of editing onto that, old chap. Also, the new generation are not all lazy good for nothings. My two sons are, no question, sleep on the floor if there was work in the bed, but I doubt they represent they majority. At least I hope they don't..

KyussBishop

Libertarianism over social issues is more representative of young adults today; the US style of 'Libertarianism' is a cynical attempt to hijack social Libertarianism, and use it to promote economic 'Libertarianism', i.e. to free finance and business to commit massive fraud, like what just destroyed much of the world economy.

I'm all for social Libertarianism, but don't pretend like any of that other crap is in any way representative of youth/young-adults today.

Iwasfrozen

KyussBishop wrote: »

Libertarianism over social issues is more representative of young adults today; the US style of 'Libertarianism' is a cynical attempt to hijack social Libertarianism, and use it to promote economic 'Libertarianism', i.e. to free finance and business to commit massive fraud, like what just destroyed much of the world economy.

I'm all for social Libertarianism, but don't pretend like any of that other crap is in any way representative of youth/young-adults today.

That's funny. I could have sworn the socialisation of private debt destroyed the economy.

garhjw

Trade unions are the problem with this country. The laziness and sense of entitlement they promote set this country and a road to ruin long before the "bankers". You have thousands of idiots getting paid €60k a year.

seven_eleven

Never mind young people, but who in the jaysus would be "just fine" with FF/FG?!

Bunch of morons.

Iwasfrozen

seven_eleven wrote: »

Never mind young people, but who in the jaysus would be "just fine" with FF/FG?!

Bunch of morons.

Grass is always greener...

What would you do? If you were Taoiseach?

downonthefarm

we should just govern ourselves and go back to bartering

KyussBishop

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

That's funny. I could have sworn the socialisation of private debt destroyed the economy.

Yes because absent the bailouts, which would lead to cascading bank failures, our economy would currently be running perfectly fine, right?

Knowing Libertarians, this would magically turn out to be governments fault as well somehow; that's what Libertarians are (many unwittingly - as useful idiots): Apologists/denialists for widespread private fraud in finance/business, who to try to spin every instance of private corruption and profligacy, so the blame falls on government, in order to argue that government should get out of the way of private fraud/corruption/rent-seeking 'wealth/job-creation'.

It's a movement that is very cynically and successfully designed, to get people to argue against their own best interests (in allowing massive fraud/corruption to go unchecked), while being utterly fooled into thinking they are arguing for greater 'freedoms' for themselves and society (or just giving those who know better, an ideological narrative to superficially justify various forms of greed/fraud, at the expense of the rest of society).

downonthefarm

garhjw wrote: »

Trade unions are the problem with this country. The laziness and sense of entitlement they promote set this country and a road to ruin long before the "bankers". You have thousands of idiots getting paid €60k a year.

hey,them trade unions are keeping my job safe from jobsbridgers

Iwasfrozen

KyussBishop wrote: »

Yes because absent the bailouts, which would lead to cascading bank failures, our economy would currently be running perfectly fine, right?

Knowing Libertarians, this would magically turn out to be governments fault as well somehow; that's what Libertarians are (many unwittingly - as useful idiots): Apologists/denialists for widespread private fraud in finance/business, who to try to spin every instance of private corruption and profligacy, so the blame falls on government, in order to argue that government should get out of the way of private fraud/corruption/rent-seeking 'wealth/job-creation'.

It's a movement that is very cynically and successfully designed, to get people to argue against their own best interests (in allowing massive fraud/corruption to go unchecked), while being utterly fooled into thinking they are arguing for greater 'freedoms' for themselves and society (or just giving those who know better, an ideological narrative to superficially justify various forms of greed/fraud, at the expense of the rest of society).

Of course our economy would have suffered had our banks failed? But the debt would have remained in the private hands of those who's riskless behaviour brought about it's destruction. But foreign banks would have come in and taken over and our economy would be in a much better state now.

Your argument that Libertarians "trick" people into going against their best interests kind of falls apart when you realise there is no collective "upper class" mind. Also the staunchest supporters of Libertarianism tends to be University academics and intellectuals. The very sort of people you claim would suffer under privatisation of the third level system.

I don't think it takes a genius to realise smaller government = less opportunity for the government to interfere in your life.

Iwasfrozen

downonthefarm wrote: »

hey,them trade unions are keeping my job safe from jobsbridgers

Then join the jobsbridgers. If they're willing to work for less money then you then it's not fair you're in a job and they aren't.

downonthefarm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Then join the jobsbridgers. If they're willing to work for less money then you then it's not fair you're in a job and they aren't.

not fair?i got my job because i EARNED
it,not because it was given to me

Iwasfrozen

downonthefarm wrote: »

not fair?i got my job because i EARNED
it,not because it was given to me

And how are job bridgers supposed to earn their job unless they get the opportunity?

Fact is if someone equally qualified is willing to do your job for less money then the union stopping this is unfair. Now your experience may mean you are worth the extra money but that's for your employer to decide. Not the Union.

downonthefarm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

And how are job bridgers supposed to earn their job unless they get the opportunity?

Fact is if someone equally qualified is willing to do your job for less money then the union stopping this is unfair. Now your experience may mean you are worth the extra money but that's for your employer to decide. Not the Union.

but thats what i am getting at,the unions have the country over a barrel,
that croke park was a sickening disgrace and and example of the greed and culture of backslapping bs that was rife in the day

Iwasfrozen

downonthefarm wrote: »

but thats what i am getting at,the unions have the country over a barrel,
that croke park was a sickening disgrace and and example of the greed and culture of backslapping bs that was rife in the day

Couldn't agree more the Unions should never have been given the power social partnership entitles them to. Some anti union law to break up the conglomerates like ICTU and SITU would go a long way.