Of politicians and promises

Foxhound38

A running theme in Irish politics since the recession hit has been the percieved notion that certain politicians or parties have broken promises made during elections - whether that be Fianna Fail on keeping the economy strong, Fine Gael on preventing abortion, Labour on stopping college fees etc etc.

I'm not disputing that one way or another - but it does make me wonder whether all the blame can go to parties and politicians in this, or whether the Irish voters themselves are also culpable for incentivizing what might be a systemic problem - in that we're only willing to believe what we want to belive when it comes to election time, and so we are only prepared to vote for parties that are willing to spin us the yarn we want to hear at the time, truth bedamned.

To put it another way - take a 3 party election as we largely had last time between FF, FG and Labour. Imagine a situation whereby 2 of those parties lied to the electorate in the form of promises they can't keep once in power, and the other one took a conscious decision to only speak in terms of what it knew to be the truth (ie: the countries finances are in the sh*tter, probably will be for the next 10 years, we will in all likelihood have to continue paying bondholders for a time, we'll have to raise taxes on XYZ, and we'll have to cut ABC).

Would the truthful party in this scenerio be rewarded for their honesty with votes, or would they simply drown in the sea of bullsh1t spouted by the two other parties telling standard election lies? If the result is the latter, then surely the Irish people are at least in some way as responsible as the politicians for the frequency of lying in Irish politics?

Or am I wrong on this one?

galwayrush

AH promised to be a politics free zone at least one night per week, aw well.

hfallada

There is only really 4 parties in Ireland. One are a shower of nut jobs, another have unhealthy obsession with protecting the interest of the unions( they havent said a word about the bus strike) and like to attack the rich(aka anyone with college degree and decent job). And the other two are practically the same.

You dont really have a choice in elections. When you are a high income earner you just pick FF or FG. If you are in a union you probably pick Labour. Plus most Irish people just vote for the parties their partents voted for. So does anyone really care whether the party they voted for does anything, as they probably will vote for them again

Foxhound38

hfallada wrote: »

There is only really 4 parties in Ireland. One are a shower of nut jobs, another have unhealthy obsession with protecting the interest of the unions( they havent said a word about the bus strike) and like to attack the rich(aka anyone with college degree and decent job). And the other two are practically the same.

You dont really have a choice in elections. When you are a high income earner you just pick FF or FG. If you are in a union you probably pick Labour. Plus most Irish people just vote for the parties their partents voted for. So does anyone really care whether the party they voted for does anything, as they probably will vote for them again

So why are those same people constantly moaning about the need for change so, if it's as you say?

Senna

One problem is we cant elect one party on its own, we are always forced into coalitions. When two parties join a coalition both have to compromise on election promises to satisfy the other party in government.

hatrickpatrick

I'm so tired of seeing this argument. Not everyone is well versed in economics or politics, there are people who genuinely don't understand how that world works and therefore use the information at hand at election time which includes party manifestos.

My honest opinion is that media statements should be made under some kind of oath. Don't say anything unless you mean it, bye election if you're found to have knowingly lied to the public (if circumstances change that's one thing, but deliberate lies such as Gilmore's lies over Lisbon II which were exposed by Wikileaks should merit instant loss of office in my view) would be recalled. If the people are ok with the lie they can vote them back in.

That way, politicians would be forced to have honest manifestos and people would choose the best of a bad lot, which let's face it is all we ever can do as far as politicians go. No grandstanding allowed - if you don't follow through on a policy you're out. If the people can deal with your lies they can put you back.

Essentially, the reason politicians can lie is because once we've elected them we have literally no way to recall them until their term is up. Think of it like marriage before divorce was legal - you could present whatever false persona you wanted to ensnare someone and then when your true colours emerged there would be nothing they could do about it. Politics without the people having the power to dissolve their government by popular demand before their term is up is a perfect breeding ground for bait-and-switch chancers.

DEFTLEFTHAND

Like Churchill said 'The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter'

It's very easy to play games in a system like ours. The majority of voters will buy anything, they don't research proposals or educate themselves on the details before voting.

dxhound2005

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I'm so tired of seeing this argument. Not everyone is well versed in economics or politics, there are people who genuinely don't understand how that world works and therefore use the information at hand at election time which includes party manifestos.

My honest opinion is that media statements should be made under some kind of oath. Don't say anything unless you mean it, bye election if you're found to have knowingly lied to the public (if circumstances change that's one thing, but deliberate lies such as Gilmore's lies over Lisbon II which were exposed by Wikileaks should merit instant loss of office in my view) would be recalled. If the people are ok with the lie they can vote them back in.

That way, politicians would be forced to have honest manifestos and people would choose the best of a bad lot, which let's face it is all we ever can do as far as politicians go. No grandstanding allowed - if you don't follow through on a policy you're out. If the people can deal with your lies they can put you back.

Essentially, the reason politicians can lie is because once we've elected them we have literally no way to recall them until their term is up. Think of it like marriage before divorce was legal - you could present whatever false persona you wanted to ensnare someone and then when your true colours emerged there would be nothing they could do about it. Politics without the people having the power to dissolve their government by popular demand before their term is up is a perfect breeding ground for bait-and-switch chancers.

How would this system of the dissolution of parliament by popular demand work? Are there any examples of it in operation in any other democracy?

Christ the Redeemer

The sooner we get used to the fact that politics in this nation and every other western "democracy" is a façade that conceals a banking dictatorship the sooner we can all band together to end it.

It does not matter who we vote into power. It hasn't for a long time.

Foxhound38

Christ the Redeemer wrote: »

The sooner we get used to the fact that politics in this nation and every other western "democracy" is a façade that conceals a banking dictatorship the sooner we can all band together to end it.

It does not matter who we vote into power. It hasn't for a long time.

If you are correct, when was the last time it did?

Karl Stein

A party could have a crack off honesty but the opposing parties' PRopaganda advisers would be all over it like a soup sandwich.

hatrickpatrick

dxhound2005 wrote: »

How would this system of the dissolution of parliament by popular demand work? Are there any examples of it in operation in any other democracy?

Pretty simple I would have thought - just as the government can call a general election any time it wants, if a sizable enough proportion of the population call for one then it happens.
Likewise, if a sizable enough proportion of any particular constituency call for a bye election, it also happens.