Would people support a protest specifically aimed at corruption and cronyism?

hatrickpatrick

Spin-off thread from the Gov't Lockout thread as today's events have rendered it (legitimately) unfair to continue discussing pre-protest ideology when what everyone wants to debate now is the fiasco which occurred after the protest (not pointing any fingers).

A lot of people in that thread stated that they don't support protests because austerity is our only option. I don't agree personally but let's leave that entire issue to one side for a moment and concentrate on the other point, which was oft overlooked in the thread, or lost in the arguing over austerity:
We do not live in a society of equals. We do not live in a society in which there is accountability, equality in the application of justice, penalties for incompetence, negligence or willful malfeasance, or the sense of "one person, one vote". I don't think there are many people who would deny that, even if there are differences over how to respond to it, or whether it's even a negative thing to begin with - people can debate those points but I doubt many will claim that any of the above is untrue. I cited several examples in the protest thread, which I will repost here for convenience - have a read through them and decide for yourself if cronyism, inequality, elitism and impunity are rife in Irish society. If you don't believe they are, that's a perfectly valid viewpoint, although I would be very interested to hear how one justifies that belief in the face of the following evidence.

Exhibit A. http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/anglo/

Exhibit B. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mahon-tribunal/in-brief-the-16-key-findings-in-the-mahon-tribunal-report-3058680.html

Exhibit C. http://www.thejournal.ie/corrupt-payments-to-councillors-were-abuse-of-democratic-system-mahon-392379-Mar2012/

Exhibit D. http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0322/298932-moriarty/

Exhibit E. http://www.herald.ie/news/this-man-owes-28bn-but-gets-200k-a-year-to-live-here-27994668.html

Exhibit F. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68917498

Exhibit G. http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/25-years-of-levies-to-pay-for-quinn-losses-203452.html

Exhibit H. http://www.thejournal.ie/taoiseach-breaches-pay-cap-to-award-former-advisor-e35k-pay-rise-295889-Dec2011/


This is just a handful of examples of what I would describe as a litany of abuses over the last number of years. Any one of the items on this list would be good enough grounds by itself for anger, in my view, but taken together the list paints a picture of a wider culture in Irish politics (arguably in all politics).

My question to ye is this. Let's suppose we organized a protest movement which was very specifically not an anti austerity protest, nor a catch-all left wing protest, nor a freeman protest or any of the myriad of issues which tend to piggyback on these large movements (not saying they're invalid, but I must say I find the piggybacking objectionable as it destroys the credibility of all movements involved) and was marketed very strictly and clearly as an anti-corruption movement. March against cronyism, march for an equal society, march for fairness in the law and in the application of justice, march for new laws against political elitism, march for a proper chasing down of those who have slipped through the net, etc.

Would people support such a movement? Would people who objected to today's protest for one reason or another support such a movement?

Note: This movement would *NOT* be designed to fix the economy, so replies of "this wouldn't fix it so why bother" are redundant; This is based on the belief that fixing the economy isn't the only desirable objective and that simply living in a fair an accountable society is a good enough aim in and of itself to warrant its own protest movement.

If you would *not* support something like this, why not? Is it because you believe it would fail, you don't believe the issues I've outlined are actually bad things, or because you believe we should simply accept the broken promises of reform and accountability, and wait until the next election to do something about them? Or do you believe they are bad things but don't matter enough to warrant widespread opposition?

Would be very interested to hear replies. And let's try to keep this thread civil and troll free… Alright fine, mostly troll free

Before anyone tells me this is better suited to politics, I'll be posting it there as well later on, but as the large thread about the lockout was here on AH I'd be interested to hear from the same crowd.

Mods, please don't merge the threads, the specific reason for splintering is that the other thread is too much of a myriad of issues at this stage (ironically, much like the protest itself) for there to be any real discussion.
Would appreciate if people would stay on topic and not fall into the same trap as in the other thread.

Thoughts?

uch

No

awec

Nope. Wouldn't be seen near a protest organised by these types.

P_1

While I'd agree with the aims of such a protest, past examples of protests have shown that you just can't hold one without the likes of the SWP/Eirigi/general toerags hijacking it and it generally ending in a farce.

In short, protests don't work and I haven't got a clue what would.

delthedriver

No.

Rho b

Quote "cronyism, inequality, elitism and impunity are rife in Irish society"
They have always have been....nothing new there.

Banjoxed

Freemen, various breeds of Shinners, the far Left, the far Right and just the plain far Out like Foetus Man, and then the buggers sitting down at O'Connell Bridge annoying ordinary people trying to get home? Today drove any extra parliamentary campaign so far back that it will be impossible for them to recover any ground whatsoever.

dxhound2005

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Spin-off thread from the Gov't Lockout thread as today's events have rendered it (legitimately) unfair to continue discussing pre-protest ideology when what everyone wants to debate now is the fiasco which occurred after the protest (not pointing any fingers).

A lot of people in that thread stated that they don't support protests because austerity is our only option. I don't agree personally but let's leave that entire issue to one side for a moment and concentrate on the other point, which was oft overlooked in the thread, or lost in the arguing over austerity:
We do not live in a society of equals. We do not live in a society in which there is accountability, equality in the application of justice, penalties for incompetence, negligence or willful malfeasance, or the sense of "one person, one vote". I don't think there are many people who would deny that, even if there are differences over how to respond to it, or whether it's even a negative thing to begin with - people can debate those points but I doubt many will claim that any of the above is untrue. I cited several examples in the protest thread, which I will repost here for convenience - have a read through them and decide for yourself if cronyism, inequality, elitism and impunity are rife in Irish society. If you don't believe they are, that's a perfectly valid viewpoint, although I would be very interested to hear how one justifies that belief in the face of the following evidence.

Exhibit A. http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/anglo/

Exhibit B. http://www.independent.ie/national-news/mahon-tribunal/in-brief-the-16-key-findings-in-the-mahon-tribunal-report-3058680.html

Exhibit C. http://www.thejournal.ie/corrupt-payments-to-councillors-were-abuse-of-democratic-system-mahon-392379-Mar2012/

Exhibit D. http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0322/298932-moriarty/

Exhibit E. http://www.herald.ie/news/this-man-owes-28bn-but-gets-200k-a-year-to-live-here-27994668.html

Exhibit F. http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=68917498

Exhibit G. http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/25-years-of-levies-to-pay-for-quinn-losses-203452.html

Exhibit H. http://www.thejournal.ie/taoiseach-breaches-pay-cap-to-award-former-advisor-e35k-pay-rise-295889-Dec2011/


This is just a handful of examples of what I would describe as a litany of abuses over the last number of years. Any one of the items on this list would be good enough grounds by itself for anger, in my view, but taken together the list paints a picture of a wider culture in Irish politics (arguably in all politics).

My question to ye is this. Let's suppose we organized a protest movement which was very specifically not an anti austerity protest, nor a catch-all left wing protest, nor a freeman protest or any of the myriad of issues which tend to piggyback on these large movements (not saying they're invalid, but I must say I find the piggybacking objectionable as it destroys the credibility of all movements involved) and was marketed very strictly and clearly as an anti-corruption movement. March against cronyism, march for an equal society, march for fairness in the law and in the application of justice, march for new laws against political elitism, march for a proper chasing down of those who have slipped through the net, etc.

Would people support such a movement? Would people who objected to today's protest for one reason or another support such a movement?

Note: This movement would *NOT* be designed to fix the economy, so replies of "this wouldn't fix it so why bother" are redundant; This is based on the belief that fixing the economy isn't the only desirable objective and that simply living in a fair an accountable society is a good enough aim in and of itself to warrant its own protest movement.

If you would *not* support something like this, why not? Is it because you believe it would fail, you don't believe the issues I've outlined are actually bad things, or because you believe we should simply accept the broken promises of reform and accountability, and wait until the next election to do something about them? Or do you believe they are bad things but don't matter enough to warrant widespread opposition?

Would be very interested to hear replies. And let's try to keep this thread civil and troll free… Alright fine, mostly troll free

Before anyone tells me this is better suited to politics, I'll be posting it there as well later on, but as the large thread about the lockout was here on AH I'd be interested to hear from the same crowd.

Mods, please don't merge the threads, the specific reason for splintering is that the other thread is too much of a myriad of issues at this stage (ironically, much like the protest itself) for there to be any real discussion.
Would appreciate if people would stay on topic and not fall into the same trap as in the other thread.

Thoughts?

Thoughts.

1. Try to make your contributions a bit shorter and less repetitive. Practically every one of your posts in the other thread was this same stuff over and over. I saw your various exhibits in the other thread already.

2. Bring your evidence of any criminal activity to the relative authorities or seek legal advice on what you can do with the information. But be aware of this:


Any statement or admission made at a tribunal cannot be used in evidence against a person in criminal proceedings.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/national_government/tribunals_and_investigations/powers_of_tribunals_of_inquiry.html

SimonQuinlank

Would take the banning of the X Factor and Premiership football in this country for Irish people to actually protest it seems,not a trivial little thing like the government selling them and future generations down the river for the benefit of their cronies and the corporate elite.

awec

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

Karl Stein

Corruption is built into the system.

If you throw me a few euro I'll withdraw that comment.

hatrickpatrick

uch wrote: »

No

Ok; But why not?

awec wrote: »

Nope. Wouldn't be seen near a protest organised by these types.

"These types"? I'm very spefically proposing a protest which isn't organized or co-opted by any of the existing establshment.

P_1 wrote: »

While I'd agree with the aims of such a protest, past examples of protests have shown that you just can't hold one without the likes of the SWP/Eirigi/general toerags hijacking it and it generally ending in a farce.

In short, protests don't work and I haven't got a clue what would.

Fair enough. Personally I believe it could be possible to hold one which wasn't hijacked, but I see your point.

delthedriver wrote: »

No.

Why not?

Rho b wrote: »

Quote "cronyism, inequality, elitism and impunity are rife in Irish society"
They have always have been....nothing new there.

So what? Just because they're not new, doesn't mean we shouldn't be fighting for their eradication.

Banjoxed wrote: »

Freemen, various breeds of Shinners, the far Left, the far Right and just the plain far Out like Foetus Man, and then the buggers sitting down at O'Connell Bridge annoying ordinary people trying to get home? Today drove any extra parliamentary campaign so far back that it will be impossible for them to recover any ground whatsoever.

Today was an absolute farce, but I'm talking about a protest movement with specific and clear aims, so clear that it would be impossible for it to be hijacked. In my view, the reason these things are so often and so easily hijacked is because their message is vague enough that it can be easily twisted to fit into an agenda other than that which it was intended for.

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Thoughts.

1. Try to make your contributions a bit shorter and less repetitive. Practically every one of your posts in the other thread was this same stuff over and over. I saw your various exhibits in the other thread already.

And practically nobody responded to any of them, hence making another thread to discuss them if people want to.

2. Bring your evidence of any criminal activity to the relative authorities or seek legal advice on what you can do with the information. But be aware of this:


Any statement or admission made at a tribunal cannot be used in evidence against a person in criminal proceedings.

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government_in_ireland/national_government/tribunals_and_investigations/powers_of_tribunals_of_inquiry.html

Then that's one of the laws I would aim to have changed, along with a whole host of new anti-corruption laws to prevent anything like what we've seen ever occurring again. I stated many times in the other thread that there are a lot of things which aren't illegal but should be - part of this governments election mandate was political reform. Stamping out cronyism would definitely fall under that banner in a major way.

awec wrote: »

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

Is it not pretty clear that there are people out there with more influence on how the government behaves than others? More influence on policy making than others?

Charlie Rock wrote: »

Corruption is built into the system.

If you throw me a few euro I'll withdraw that comment.

I agree. But I refuse to accept that it can't be changed. It would take an enormous amount of work but I truly believe it could be done.

MadsL

SimonQuinlank wrote: »

Would take the banning of the X Factor and Premiership football in this country for Irish people to actually protest it .

What are we waiting for? :cool:

dxhound2005

A host of new anti corruption laws will be of no use unless there is sufficient evidence to prosecute. If you have evidence bring it forward. You might want to study the existing legislation to inform your actions.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0027/print.html

There is also the Standards in Public Office Commission.

http://www.sipo.gov.ie/en/

hatrickpatrick

dxhound2005 wrote: »

A host of new anti corruption laws will be of no use unless there is sufficient evidence to prosecute. If you have evidence bring it forward. You might want to study the existing legislation to inform your actions.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/2001/en/act/pub/0027/print.html

There is also the Standards in Public Office Commission.

http://www.sipo.gov.ie/en/

Well for example, the fact that Enda personally intervened to allow a former associate to breach a salary cap for advisors is a matter of public record, there's no question that it happened. It's not actually illegal, but it's one of the things which certainly should be.

The case of the indebted NAMA director getting 200k per year from the exchequer is another example. Not technically illegal, but utterly unacceptable - clear conflict of interest for a start, outrageous over-payment on the flip side of austerity for the masses for another thing. Neither should be allowed.

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about a protest against, not the more general issue of the economy or austerity.

IRLConor

awec wrote: »

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

Anyone who's a graduate of both DU and NUI has two Seanad votes. If my better half was Irish she'd be in that boat.

OP: Protests work either by fear (of violence) or shame. I think most reasonable people would consider the violent type of protest to be unhelpful and our politicians seem to be incapable of feeling shame. What do you think changes the mind of an Irish politician?

Painted Pony

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Well for example, the fact that Enda personally intervened to allow a former associate to breach a salary cap for advisors is a matter of public record, there's no question that it happened. It's not actually illegal, but it's one of the things which certainly should be.

The case of the indebted NAMA director getting 200k per year from the exchequer is another example. Not technically illegal, but utterly unacceptable - clear conflict of interest for a start, outrageous over-payment on the flip side of austerity for the masses for another thing. Neither should be allowed.

That's the kind of thing I'm talking about a protest against, not the more general issue of the economy or austerity.

Actually I don’t think the guidelines on caps for advisors was technically broken, though that is only because of the odd way the guideline was written. But nevertheless, your substantial point remains. Why are some paid so much (too much?) out of the public purse?

I would suggest that this is not specific to the current government. Governments past and future, and not just in Ireland, will do the same. It essentially goes back to the idea that there is competition for personnel with the private sector. And while you can point to many examples of very highly paid public officials who provided somewhat less than high quality service I think it is necessary to have broadly similar remuneration for public workers as you do for private.

If you are looking for examples of low standards in high places I think you could find better examples that the two you cite.

hatrickpatrick

Painted Pony wrote: »

Actually I don’t think the guidelines on caps for advisors was technically broken, though that is only because of the odd way the guideline was written. But nevertheless, your substantial point remains. Why are some paid so much (too much?) out of the public purse?

I would suggest that this is not specific to the current government. Governments past and future, and not just in Ireland, will do the same. It essentially goes back to the idea that there is competition for personnel with the private sector. And while you can point to many examples of very highly paid public officials who provided somewhat less than high quality service I think it is necessary to have broadly similar remuneration for public workers as you do for private.

If you are looking for examples of low standards in high places I think you could find better examples that the two you cite.

Well the thing is, in this particular case I'm not actually complaining about overpayment in general (although that's certainly something to be discussed), it's more specifically (a) the fact that Enda personally intervened to breach the rules his cabinet had set and were supposed to be enforcing (No one should be allowed to bend such rules, either they all follow them or no one does in my view) and (b) the fact that the person for whom the rules were bent just happened to be an old friend of his.

There are two issues there, firstly the fact that people in high places can choose to override or not be subject to the rules, and secondly the cronyism aspect (obvious conflict of interest in Enda intervening to help an old colleague get a pay rise, he should have stayed out of it given the conflict of interest and I would draft specific laws governing what to do in such cases).

I regard both of these as good examples of the corruption endemic in Irish politics. Things like this shouldn't be allowed to happen in the first place because there should be iron clad legislation mandating serious consequences when and if they are found to have happened.

Wibbs

hatrickpatrick, to my mind you're forgetting one thing that scuppers this from the get go and that is we actually like corruption and cronyism in this country. Look at the various scandals over the years where members of the political class were caught with their paws in the honey pot. A couple of things happened, or rather didn't happen in the case of any legal ramifications for the vast majority of them. Numero uno, these shysters share of the vote in the next election went UP. They had more support not less after being found out as corrupt. What surprises me is not so much the amount of corruption and cronyism that came out, but that more politicians didn't admit to more wrongdoing to increase their chances of re-election.

joe swanson

Nope. Legitimate protest in this country has been destroyed by 'republican', the loony left, freemen 'lets make the law up as we go along' and other nutters, supported by the likes of Clare daly (who was recently in Lithuania trying to frdd a terrorist) and Wallace etc. They have no credibility, turn a blind eye to violence and destruction. Decent people want nothing to do with them. Sad really.

Banjo String

awec wrote: »

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

That used to be a slogan up north.

Vote early and often.:pac:

Aimless "look we're really angry but have no particular goals or solutions" isn't going to achieve anything, so no. As well to sit ranting on the internet

Wibbs

I'd agree with John Lennon when he wrote the song Revolution. "You say you want a revolution?" "We'd all love to see the plan". A bunch of out of date oddballs, outliers and scroungers ain't much of a plan to be fair. If that's what passes for opposition in this nation then we are truly fcukered.

Jonny7

bluewolf wrote: »

Aimless "look we're really angry but have no particular goals or solutions" isn't going to achieve anything, so no. As well to sit ranting on the internet

Beats sitting in a tent on Dame street any day, probably more productive too

General General

So, now we've moved from away from protests that have fantastic ill thought out demands & promises... to testing the water to see if there is any demand for a promise of a fantastic protest where those ill thought of just wouldn't show up?

Yeah?

padd b1975

awec wrote: »

By the way, I am unaware of any man or woman who has more than one vote?

FWIW you can have more than one vote in a Seanad election.

chopper6

Charlie don't surf and internet people don't protest...give em broadsband and they want for nothing.

Menas

Set up a poll in this thread to get more responses.

My own take on it is that no, I would not participate for the reasons stated by some above. These protests tend to have no focus and get hijacked by the loo laas. Water flouridisation anyone?
Then you have the trouble element turning up just looking for a fight.

We are a democracy and I believe in the ballot box. I shudder to think what would happen to this country if one of these fringe groups actually did manage to topple the government.

AnonoBoy

chopper6 wrote: »

Charlie don't surf and internet people don't protest...give em broadsband and they want for nothing.

For all your complaining about people complaining about the protests, did you go out and protest yourself yesterday?

P_1

Wibbs wrote: »

hatrickpatrick, to my mind you're forgetting one thing that scuppers this from the get go and that is we actually like corruption and cronyism in this country. Look at the various scandals over the years where members of the political class were caught with their paws in the honey pot. A couple of things happened, or rather didn't happen in the case of any legal ramifications for the vast majority of them. Numero uno, these shysters share of the vote in the next election went UP. They had more support not less after being found out as corrupt. What surprises me is not so much the amount of corruption and cronyism that came out, but that more politicians didn't admit to more wrongdoing to increase their chances of re-election.

Yeah for some reason the rogue seems to be an almost hero-like figure in Ireland. Compare and contrast the penalty points transfer scandal involving a Lib Dem MP across the water and a similar case involving a TD from Roscommon who has a penchant for woolly jumpers and exotic herbs.

Protests aren't going to change this attitude that seems prevalent in the general populace in this country.

Foxhound38

Perhaps...

If it has a clear message, achievable goals, constructive tone, is well stewarded, is kept to a non-disruptive area of the city, is actually co-operative to the Gardai as opposed to centred on roaring abuse at them and breaking police lines, crusties/freemen/Eirigi/SWP/Dissident Republican types are kept out of the organizing process, political flags and banners are banned, people covering their faces are fooked out and professional protestors or those simply there to cause trouble are kept under control I'd consider it depending on what that message was and whether I accepted the premise. In short, it would need to be everything yesterdays fiasco wasn't.

I am downright hostile to what happened yesterday and how it played out. Not least because I don't support the government and this played straight into their hands by painting a picture of those opposed as off-the-hinge lunatics and morons of the highest order. I'm not against protesting, I've been at a fair few over the years - but that yesterday was an out-and-out fiasco...

Eponymous

Not a hope.

As has been touched upon here, there's too many Eirigi, SWP, Irish Republican Voice, types who'll jump on any protest bandwagon, that it becomes futile trying to have a legitimate protest about anything.

Even back in 2009 when there was a massive Congress rally, Eirigi and SWP barged their way to the front of it and mingled among various Trade Union groupings so as to make it look like they were a legitimate part of the protest.

As discontented as I may be, or may become, I want nothing whatsoever to do with these groups.

When you look back on videos of yesterday (or as some of us did, tuned into it live on Ustream), you realise that all you have is a bunch of malcontents with very little in the way of proper organisation or actual solutions.

My one concern arising from yesterday, is that the scummers have possibly touched upon a new tactic. About the same time as it all kicked off on Molesworth St., another group shut down O'Connell bridge with few Gardaí available to deal with that. With the Gardaí stretched thin, they could have an ability to cause severe disruption in several areas if timed properly. I'm just astounded that the gardaí feel that they have to be restrained. I doubt many would have had sympathy for the scummers on the bridge last night had the gardaí decided to give them a good seeing to with a combo of pepper spray and batons.

Ask them to move once, if they refuse, attempt to move them physically. If they resist that, out with the spray.

Foxhound38

Eponymous wrote: »

Not a hope.

As has been touched upon here, there's too many Eirigi, SWP, Irish Republican Voice, types who'll jump on any protest bandwagon, that it becomes futile trying to have a legitimate protest about anything.

Even back in 2009 when there was a massive Congress rally, Eirigi and SWP barged their way to the front of it and mingled among various Trade Union groupings so as to make it look like they were a legitimate part of the protest.

As discontented as I may be, or may become, I want nothing whatsoever to do with these groups.

When you look back on videos of yesterday (or as some of us did, tuned into it live on Ustream), you realise that all you have is a bunch of malcontents with very little in the way of proper organisation or actual solutions.

My one concern arising from yesterday, is that the scummers have possibly touched upon a new tactic. About the same time as it all kicked off on Molesworth St., another group shut down O'Connell bridge with few Gardaí available to deal with that. With the Gardaí stretched thin, they could have an ability to cause severe disruption in several areas if timed properly. I'm just astounded that the gardaí feel that they have to be restrained. I doubt many would have had sympathy for the scummers on the bridge last night had the gardaí decided to give them a good seeing to with a combo of pepper spray and batons.

Ask them to move once, if they refuse, attempt to move them physically. If they resist that, out with the spray.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDEcJ3yKxR0

From seeing the video of the scummers holding up traffic on the bridge, they were literally, *literally* asking for the batons to come out and that's no exhaggeration. They were actually daring them to do it. I'm not quite sure how the gardai kept their cool, but I'm glad they didn't give these idiots the satisfaction (as much as they sorely deserved it).

average hero

Ideally, yes I would (despite being considered right wing here, I'm probably considered centre in the US).

There are a number of faults though. First of all, unfortunately in this country a lot of our protests are hijacked by far left groups such as socialists, Eirigi, and far left Republican groups as stated before. This lends itself to alienating politically centre-minded people. On a side note, I hate how these groups have our flag associated with them so much.

With regards to corruption and cronyism, it's in our culture isn't it? A lot of people get jobs and opportunities here due to nepotism and the likes. Everyone 'pulls strings' as much as they can. I know people who hate the political cronyism that goes on yet they are always getting jobs from friends, or deals to save a few euro through 'cronyism'.

Our culture celebrates the underdog, and also celebrates the 'sleeveen'. The guy who strikes it lucky by whatever means possible. A chancer, a character, whatever you want to call it - but the simple fact is that all of these things contribute to our culture of cronyism and corruption.

Can you honestly say that if a large carrot was dangled in front of you if you were in a position of power that you wouldn't take it? Honestly, I would find it hard not to - and I suspect a lot of people here would as well.

Sir Humphrey Appleby

awec wrote: »

Nope. Wouldn't be seen near a protest organised by these types.

So you'll not be joining Eirigi anytime soon so?:D

Eponymous

Foxhound38 wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDEcJ3yKxR0

From seeing the video of the scummers holding up traffic on the bridge, they were literally, *literally* asking for the batons to come out and that's no exhaggeration. They were actually daring them to do it. I'm not quite sure how the gardai kept their cool, but I'm glad they didn't give these idiots the satisfaction (as much as they sorely deserved it).

Can't see the video, but I'm guessing it's their usual M.O.

The belief that "They can't touch us" and multi-angle recording thanks to smart-phones (the only thing smart about most of the protesters, tbh). As soon as a finger is laid on them it's like they were shot and selective video put on you-tube.

The other factor here is that there aren't enough Gardaí there to deal with it, so they have no option but to be restrained. No coincidence however that later on, when they heard the riot squad had left Kildare Street, they dispersed and went back to the safety of Molesworth Street.

PeadarCo

Hatrickpatrick, if you want to organise a successful protest/change you need to do a number of things. Namely get off your soapbox and engage with people instead of labeling anyone who disagree with you as government supporters, sheep etc. Thats how democracy works. Refusing to engage with your opponents is a characteristic of dictatorships.

Two inform yourself on the realities of life and the compromise that people and politicians have to make and live with instead of living in your own black and white fantasy world.

If you want democracy/protests to work for you have to be able to address people daily concerns in a meaningful fashion. Bringing Dublin city centre to standstill at rush hour without warning is the very opposite of this.

Tiddlypeeps

I think your goal is still to broad. For a protest to have any real effect it needs to be both well organised and have a very clear and achievable goal in mind. That goal needs to be something the majority of people agree would be a good change and is simple enough that every tom dick and harry understands well what exactly they are protesting for.

I don't know what specific change you could protest for that would tackle cronyism.

You could go after a specific person and push for equerries into their wrong doings. I have a feeling that if just one of the higher ups in the whole anglo tapes debacle was brought to justice then the finger pointing would start and everything about all others involved would be out in the open very quickly. I think that's why there is no push being made in this area by the government, they know some of their own will get dragged through the mud if the allegations start so they leave it alone and let the guilty walk free. If people pushed hard enough tho for one person to be prosecuted tho I think it is achievable.

That won't fix the bigger issue tho. It might scare some politicians into thinking twice about accepting a brown envelope but probably not many and not for long. People have short memories.

To address the issue with cronyism we would need a very specific set of laws that very harshly punish anyone caught doing anything dodgy, loss of dail seat, loss of pension and any benefits associated with the job, a ban from ever holding a government seat again and possible jail time. That would be a good start. Laws like that will never get passed tho, because the people we need to pass the bill are the people the laws directly effect. No amount of protesting will force the government to consider a bill that effects themselves so harshly.

So to answer the question you actually asked, yes I would support a protest against cronyism (as long as it wasn't hijacked by the usual crowd) but I would
not attend because I would view it as a waste of time.


Afterthought:
There is something people could protest for that would give the people the power to force a law like the above to be introduced but it would still be very difficult to convince the Dail to consider passing it. We lost the ability to force a referendum about 50 years ago or so. We used to be able to do it by getting a list of 50,000 signatures supporting the proposal. I'm not sure how it happened but politicians at the time managed to have that removed from the constitution. If we could get that or something similar back it would mean that we could force changes on the government if enough people supported the cause. It would be difficult to get something like this reimplemented but I think it would be a lot easier than directly pushing for laws on political corruption straight off.

Czarcasm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

My question to ye is this. Let's suppose we organized a protest movement which was very specifically not an anti austerity protest, nor a catch-all left wing protest, nor a freeman protest or any of the myriad of issues which tend to piggyback on these large movements (not saying they're invalid, but I must say I find the piggybacking objectionable as it destroys the credibility of all movements involved) and was marketed very strictly and clearly as an anti-corruption movement. March against cronyism, march for an equal society, march for fairness in the law and in the application of justice, march for new laws against political elitism, march for a proper chasing down of those who have slipped through the net, etc.

Would people support such a movement? Would people who objected to today's protest for one reason or another support such a movement?

Quite simply, no. Because such a protest is like the many that came before it, lacking in any clear focus and definition, and packed to the brim full of utopian idealism. We don't live in a utopian society, and you don't fell a tree merely by pruning the branches. That's effectively all these silly marches and protests and doing, is trying to fell a 100 year old oak tree with a leaf blower.

Going after current government does nothing, because it's not just corruption in government that fuels our society, it's bloody well rampant in the private sector too, from the top down, to the bottom up. Protests against private enterprise are just as effective as protests against the public sector, also rife with corruption.

The best way to tackle the problem is at the root, and a hell of a lot closer to home too - start with your own neighbours and friends, start even younger again to teach your children ethical standards of business practice, teach them that they don't HAVE to be corrupt, and there are ways to get what you want without stepping on a few heads to break a few eggs.

Before anyone tells me this is better suited to politics, I'll be posting it there as well later on, but as the large thread about the lockout was here on AH I'd be interested to hear from the same crowd.

What did the Politics forum ever do to you?

When people aren't listening to you in one thread, the solution is NOT to start your own thread to air your views separately, the solution is not to cross post the same post across different fora (I believe that'd be against the rules of Boards.ie too if you read the charter, I hope you wouldn't be considering breaking the rules just to suit your own agenda? There's a word for that, which escapes me right now...)

Mods, please don't merge the threads, the specific reason for splintering is that the other thread is too much of a myriad of issues at this stage (ironically, much like the protest itself) for there to be any real discussion.

It's only real discussion if it takes place on your terms then and everybody else needs to listen to what you have to say, even if it is only the fifth or sixth time they've heard it? Eventually you're going to have to go back to the drawing board tbh, because trying to wedge in your opinions about Irish politics into every thread that has a sniff of politics about it is just tiresome, and at this stage - well past it's sell by date.

Would appreciate if people would stay on topic and not fall into the same trap as in the other thread.

Your vague, idealist, cloud cuckoo land, pie in the sky, rabble rousing philosophy just isn't going to work Patrick tbh, people have heard it all before, and it hasn't struck a chord with them, because rather than being afforded the luxury of your idealism, they're struggling with the minutae of the daily grind and trying to cope with far starker realities closer to home. They don't have time to be doing silly protest marches that achieve nothing when they're thinking about putting food on the table or keeping a roof over their heads. These are the practical realities you're missing out on, and if you target and help THOSE people to get what they need, they might be more amenable to listening to what you have to say then.

Actions Patrick, not more rabble rousing speeches, when people see you making an effort to help them, they'll feel a lot more positive about wanting to help you.

Painted Pony

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Well the thing is, in this particular case I'm not actually complaining about overpayment in general (although that's certainly something to be discussed), it's more specifically (a) the fact that Enda personally intervened to breach the rules his cabinet had set and were supposed to be enforcing (No one should be allowed to bend such rules, either they all follow them or no one does in my view) and (b) the fact that the person for whom the rules were bent just happened to be an old friend of his.

There are two issues there, firstly the fact that people in high places can choose to override or not be subject to the rules, and secondly the cronyism aspect (obvious conflict of interest in Enda intervening to help an old colleague get a pay rise, he should have stayed out of it given the conflict of interest and I would draft specific laws governing what to do in such cases).

I regard both of these as good examples of the corruption endemic in Irish politics. Things like this shouldn't be allowed to happen in the first place because there should be iron clad legislation mandating serious consequences when and if they are found to have happened.

Well this is how you have interpreted what happened. You may well be right but an alternative explanation is that Kenny wanted to retain one particular advisor and simply had to pay him more to entice him away from a private sector job.
(If his motive was to see an extra few quid in this guys pocket, surely he would simply have let him take a job in the private sector?) There’s a bit of a difference between these two scenarios and we can only guess where the truth lies.

At the more benign end of the scale I would say it was a sin on a par with a broken election promise. Many would disapprove but it’s a fair bit short of corruption.

Even within this government there were far dodgier doings than that.

KyussBishop

Probably the only dissenting voice in this thread, but I think it could work, if it had the right support (specifically, I think some professional journalists who have a past/present history investigating corruption, could contribute a lot to forming the groups aims/message), and if enough people could be brought on board.

It would need to be planned very well, with a lot of behind-the-scenes work, and probably wider activity outside of protests, but I think it could be very valuable if done right; I'd certainly consider getting involved organizing, if it looked well managed (it's something that is very conspicuously missing in Ireland I think...).

The fringe groups that tend to take over protests are a problem, but they are fringe groups in the end, and can probably be outvoiced/overpowered if enough numbers could participate in anti-corruption protests, to make them an insignificant (even if loud) minority.
You could even try talking to these groups, to ask them to stay away, pointing out that they are harming the protest...


To be honest, I really don't understand the negativity (even outright hostility in some posts) towards the idea in this thread; I actually don't think it seems far-fetched at all, but the general message in this thread seems to be a defeatist "corruption exists, there is nothing you can do about it, don't try" type message, which as an attitude is just a self-fulfilling-prophecy, as that may be exactly what stops a protest movement reaching a critical mass.

You're not going to defeat corruption from the ground-up, working within your community, or by tackling isolated instances of corruption in the public/private sphere, because the Gresham's Dynamic ensures that those who are corrupt, will get a competitive edge over those who are not (the idea that "dishonest dealings in business tend to drive honest dealings out of the market" - this is one of the most useful things to know about all types of corruption, in my view).

So, you need to tackle it right at the core: With laws and the proper enforcement of laws. Anything less will not overcome the wider 'culture' of fraud/corruption that the Gresham's dynamic creates.

Wibbs

KyussBishop wrote: »

To be honest, I really don't understand the negativity (even outright hostility in some posts) towards the idea in this thread; I actually don't think it seems far-fetched at all, but the general message in this thread seems to be a defeatist "corruption exists, there is nothing you can do about it, don't try" type message, which as an attitude is just a self-fulfilling-prophecy, as that may be exactly what stops a protest movement reaching a critical mass.

Oh I agree KB. Where my cynicism comes from is it seems that a large chunk of the Irish population actually like, or have a major blind spot towards and are more likely to vote for the guy or gal that is seen as a "rogue". History and the dail, including the present Dail are living examples of this. Time and time and time again it can be shown that the sure way to never mind get back into power, but to massively increase ones share of the vote was to be seen/charged with corruption.

So, you need to tackle it right at the core: With laws and the proper enforcement of laws. Anything less will not overcome the wider 'culture' of fraud/corruption that the Gresham's dynamic creates.

I agree 100%, though again I can't see turkeys voting for xmas and I can't see the Irish electorate stopping voting turkeys in in the first place.

That is the sad part for me. Those misguided/dodgy/damned stupid collection of eejits the other day marching on the Dail ARE our opposition.

KyussBishop

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh I agree KB. Where my cynicism comes from is it seems that a large chunk of the Irish population actually like, or have a major blind spot towards and are more likely to vote for the guy or gal that is seen as a "rogue". History and the dail, including the present Dail are living examples of this. Time and time and time again it can be shown that the sure way to never mind get back into power, but to massively increase ones share of the vote was to be seen/charged with corruption.


I agree 100%, though again I can't see turkeys voting for xmas and I can't see the Irish electorate stopping voting turkeys in in the first place.

That is the sad part for me. Those misguided/dodgy/damned stupid collection of eejits the other day marching on the Dail ARE our opposition.

I agree that there's certainly a wider acceptance of corruption within Ireland, and that is something that needs to be fought against as well; I think actually spreading awareness about the damage corruption is causing to the entire country, could be a big part of such a protest movement (even just educating about the Gresham's Dynamic, I think could be a very useful thing).

If people could properly make the connection, that it is primarily unethical acts within finance/banking (and government, to an extent) that led to the economic crisis and austerity the country is facing today (not the "look to yourselves" nonsense you hear perpetuated), then people may be more motivated to make sure it doesn't happen again (by pushing for properly written up and enforced anti-fraud regulations and anti-corruption laws).

A lot of people seem ready to excuse unethical acts and corruption, just because (in the former case) much of it isn't illegal (even though it should be), and in the latter case, because it has gone unprosecuted ("therefore it didn't actually happen/wasn't-illegal"), or because it has gone uninvestigated ("where is the evidence? there is none because it didn't happen").

I also get the impression there is a lot of suppression of evidence as well, such as with Jonathan Sugarman, a whistleblower who was threatened with prison by financial regulators(!), if he exposed fraud, and also due to more anecdotal instances I've heard of in the past, of journalists being threatened with legal or other personally damaging action, if they exposed corruption/fraud (defamation/libel laws here, I believe are meant to cause a credible chilling-effect; nevermind that a lot of our media simply just doesn't do much investigative journalism anymore).

That raises an additional issue for such a protest movement as well: If it started to become anywhere near effective, it (and its organizers) would likely start to be subject to intimidation/threats as well; still worth doing mind.

hatrickpatrick

PeadarCo wrote: »

Hatrickpatrick, if you want to organise a successful protest/change you need to do a number of things. Namely get off your soapbox and engage with people instead of labeling anyone who disagree with you as government supporters, sheep etc. Thats how democracy works. Refusing to engage with your opponents is a characteristic of dictatorships.

Sorry but when have I ever refused to engage with anyone? My OP makes it very clear that I welcome debate. Maybe you have me confused with someone else...?

Two inform yourself on the realities of life and the compromise that people and politicians have to make and live with instead of living in your own black and white fantasy world.

Translation: Corruption must be tolerated since it's somehow necessary to society? All I'm asking or is that people who are negaged in political wrongdoing be held accountable for it, how does that in any way clash with the reality of life?

If you want democracy/protests to work for you have to be able to address people daily concerns in a meaningful fashion. Bringing Dublin city centre to standstill at rush hour without warning is the very opposite of this.

Which is why I stated very clearly that the people who did so on Wednesday were scum. I don't and never will support that.

Honestly wonder if you're confusing me with someone else?

KyussBishop wrote: »

I also get the impression there is a lot of suppression of evidence as well, such as with Jonathan Sugarman, a whistleblower who was threatened with prison by financial regulators(!), if he exposed fraud, and also due to more anecdotal instances I've heard of in the past, of journalists being threatened with legal or other personally damaging action, if they exposed corruption/fraud (defamation/libel laws here, I believe are meant to cause a credible chilling-effect; nevermind that a lot of our media simply just doesn't do much investigative journalism anymore).

That raises an additional issue for such a protest movement as well: If it started to become anywhere near effective, it (and its organizers) would likely start to be subject to intimidation/threats as well; still worth doing mind.

Have you seen this?
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2013/sep/17/irish-independent-ireland

Summary, Irish Indo investigative journalist apparently fired for being too investigative of the Garda commissioner. One of the most sickening things I've read all week.

hatrickpatrick

Painted Pony wrote: »

Well this is how you have interpreted what happened. You may well be right but an alternative explanation is that Kenny wanted to retain one particular advisor and simply had to pay him more to entice him away from a private sector job.

He broke his own rules. He agreed to a pay cap and then overruled it. That in and of itself is the kind of thing that shouldn't be allowed - those who makes the rules should be subject to them.

Lawrence1895

Isn't it up to each and every single person, how to behave at a protest? Just wondering...

hatrickpatrick

Czarcasm wrote: »

Quite simply, no. Because such a protest is like the many that came before it, lacking in any clear focus and definition, and packed to the brim full of utopian idealism. We don't live in a utopian society, and you don't fell a tree merely by pruning the branches. That's effectively all these silly marches and protests and doing, is trying to fell a 100 year old oak tree with a leaf blower.

I want to put people who break the law in prison. I want to make new laws to punish wrongdoing where there aren't already laws against is.
Can you explain how any of this is unrealistic?!

Going after current government does nothing, because it's not just corruption in government that fuels our society, it's bloody well rampant in the private sector too, from the top down, to the bottom up. Protests against private enterprise are just as effective as protests against the public sector, also rife with corruption.

The private sector don't make the law. Corruption in the private sector is rampant as well but they aren't responsible for running the country and therefore aren't as important a target as the lawmakers themselves.

The best way to tackle the problem is at the root, and a hell of a lot closer to home too - start with your own neighbours and friends, start even younger again to teach your children ethical standards of business practice, teach them that they don't HAVE to be corrupt, and there are ways to get what you want without stepping on a few heads to break a few eggs.

Agreed, but that doesn't do anything to tackle the current political climate does it?

What did the Politics forum ever do to you?

Nothing at all, hence why I post there all the time and will be posting this debate there when it's finished here, as I said in my OP...

When people aren't listening to you in one thread, the solution is NOT to start your own thread to air your views separately,

The other thread was about the lockout, this thread is about starting a new protest group. The other thread was about an anti austerity protest, this one is anti corruption. I was accused of hijacking the other thread hence why I made my own.

the solution is not to cross post the same post across different fora (I believe that'd be against the rules of Boards.ie too if you read the charter, I hope you wouldn't be considering breaking the rules just to suit your own agenda? There's a word for that, which escapes me right now...)

It's against the rules to have a debate on Politics about something that's already been debated on AH? O_o

It's only real discussion if it takes place on your terms then and everybody else needs to listen to what you have to say, even if it is only the fifth or sixth time they've heard it?

I never said that, and I don't appreciate the condescension. The point of this thread is that I don't want an anti/pro austerity debate here since austerity and corruption are completely different issues.

Eventually you're going to have to go back to the drawing board tbh, because trying to wedge in your opinions about Irish politics into every thread that has a sniff of politics about it is just tiresome, and at this stage - well past it's sell by date.

So talking about a protest in a thread about protesting is tiresome? Just a minute ago you said I should have continued this debate in the other thread instead of making a new one, which is it?

Your vague, idealist, cloud cuckoo land, pie in the sky, rabble rousing philosophy just isn't going to work Patrick tbh, people have heard it all before, and it hasn't struck a chord with them, because rather than being afforded the luxury of your idealism, they're struggling with the minutae of the daily grind and trying to cope with far starker realities closer to home.

So something isn't worth protesting about unless it has a direct and immediate affect on your own life then?
Can you explain, how is asking for anti corruption laws "vague", "idealist", "cloud cuckoo land", "pie in the sky", or "rabble rousing"? How is it any different to calling for new laws against gangland crime, or bullying, or sexual harassment?

They don't have time to be doing silly protest marches that achieve nothing when they're thinking about putting food on the table or keeping a roof over their heads. These are the practical realities you're missing out on, and if you target and help THOSE people to get what they need, they might be more amenable to listening to what you have to say then.

Why do you have to do both? That's not what this movement would be about. It's possible to care about your own life and care about wanting to live in a better society *at the same time*. You're acting as if once you have what you need, you couldn't give a f*ck about anything else. Is this why there are so many "how bad do you really have it" questions directed at me and others who object to corruption? If I have everything I need I should just shut up and not care that others don't, or that I live in a horribly corrupt society? Question, during the civil rights movement up North would you have applied the same criteria to a protestant who fought for catholic civil rights? He shouldn't bother since his life is ok and that's all that matters? What about a white man joining the US 1950s civil rights movement? He should just shut up and concentrate on his own sh!t?

Would be an unbelievably depressing world to live in if everyone lived by your apparent philosophy. Sort yourself out and once you're ok, that's all that matters. Eh, no thanks. I care about others too, and I care about the type of country I live in.

Actions Patrick, not more rabble rousing speeches, when people see you making an effort to help them, they'll feel a lot more positive about wanting to help you.

Actions, sure. So what actions can I take against government corruption apart from legitimate protesting or starting a new political party (which I fully intend to as soon as I'm finished college)? What are you advocating? Calling Joe to complain? Blockading the Dail, because that worked out well for everyone involved? writing letters to whipped TDs who are powerless to do anything unless the cabinet lets them?
What are you suggesting instead of a legitimate protest movement?

Do you regard this man as being as much of a waste of space as I am, since he achieved nothing and he himself wasn't being targeted, and what he did had nothing to do with everyday life?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeFzeNAHEhU

wp_rathead

SimonQuinlank wrote: »

Would take the banning of the X Factor and Premiership football in this country for Irish people to actually protest it seems,not a trivial little thing like the government selling them and future generations down the river for the benefit of their cronies and the corporate elite.

this attitude of "ah we the only ones doing anything- ye are all idiots" is fecking pathetic..

P_1

The problem is that attempts at reform/revolution from the top down (which is what I think you're proposing) have historically proven to basically not work. Realistically you'd need to start from the bottom up which is very much a long term process that certainly won't happen overnight.

KyussBishop

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Have you seen this?
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2013/sep/17/irish-independent-ireland

Summary, Irish Indo investigative journalist apparently fired for being too investigative of the Garda commissioner. One of the most sickening things I've read all week.

I'd heard of it alright, though was have not kept up on the details; sickening indeed, though also something I'm not that surprised about (even if saying such is a bit trite I guess).

KyussBishop

P_1 wrote: »

The problem is that attempts at reform/revolution from the top down (which is what I think you're proposing) have historically proven to basically not work. Realistically you'd need to start from the bottom up which is very much a long term process that certainly won't happen overnight.

Not really - it's pretty easy to implement reform top-down just by putting in the right anti-corruption/anti-fraud laws, and bolstering regulations against future fraud (arguably that's the only way, as we have already seen business/finance can't be trusted to self-regulate).

The main bottom-up work involved with that, is developing a strong enough political movement and political pressure, to make that happen.