Young Persons Political Party

youngpolitico

Hi all,

I'm a 21 year old student. The next general election will be the first time I will be able to vote for who is to represent me in Dáil Éireann. I've been thinking for a while who I would vote for, but party wise, I would not give my vote to any of them. I would also not give my vote to an independent candidate as I don't think it does your vote any justice, as they will never be in any real power to make a difference.

I'm not, by any stretch, a political expert, but I do follow irish politics closely and I am very interested in it. My problem with irish politics is that the parties seem the same to me. They will promise you the sun moon and stars until they get into power, but in the end they do what they want. There is also no political party representing me and people my age. There's no voice for students in Dáil Éireann. People between the ages of 18-30 don't really take part in politics and a lot don't even exercise their right to vote, which I believe is a very important duty as a citizen of this country.

Ireland has some of the best universities in the world, but the brains that these universities develop are being used by other nations around the world as the graduates that come from them are emigrating. Huge multi national companies seek Irish brains to further their businesses. Why can't these brains be used to better this country?

The point I'm trying to get at here is, I believe that if people between 18 and 30 had a real voice in Dáil eireann, they would involve themselves more in politics, and so, the running of this country.

But I don't think that the current parties have room for new fresh minds to challenge the older, 'set in their ways' hierarchy. I believe we need a new party.

My dream would be to establish such a party that could challenge elections over the next decade, both local and general, and maybe one day be able to fully utilise the full potential of this great country, and the young people with the brains to make it great. We're sick of listening to the same old heads. It's time we made a difference.

Please let me know what your thoughts on a new party are. I'd love to see if people think I'm mad, or if they actually think this could be possible, just like I do.

Annasopra

Actually I know loads of people between 18-30 in student politics and in all of the political parties. I dont agree with you that young people dont get politically involved. USI just registered 20,000 new voters.

youngpolitico

I understand a lot of people are involved in political parties and that a lot of young people do vote, but do you not think that they are strong armed by the hierarchy in these parties and don't actually get their views and ideas across because they must follow the party line? I'm not arguing here I'm just looking for feedback. I think if their was a new, fresh party, it would be good for the country.

coolemon

youngpolitico wrote: »

They will promise you the sun moon and stars until they get into power, but in the end they do what they want......and a lot don't even exercise their right to vote, which I believe is a very important duty as a citizen of this country.

You are contradicting yourself there.

Some young scut will promise the sun, moon and stars and do what he wants when he gets in. Age has nothing to do with it.

I don't see why its so important to vote for the oligarchy.

The whole political system is rigged to give you and everyone else as little say in running affairs as possible without social instability.

The "citizen" is reduced to a marginalised and alienated herd animal to be encouraged in and out of voting booths every 4-5 years to legitimate and justify the rigged mafia state.

So no, I think its a terrible idea.

KingBrian2

The party system is too rigid, it would be better with more informal politics. We agree on the important issues just the established parties disagree profoundly on implementation. Some parties prefer the Seanad to have more powers while others still believe the constitution or by referendum is the best solution to dealing with the problems of the day. I rather the Dail being more independent minded and allowing more space for a variety of parties from across the political spectrum instead of just a handful of large parties.

For Reals

Every once in a while a party will carry out a young up and coming star. Usually giving them a speaking slot at some AGM or other and they'll have a little bunch of school chums cheering them on and all the older crowd will roll their eyes being all cute and possibly remark about their student days in follow up speeches......
Student politicians will happily seem to go their own way to get students on side, but will more than happily kiss the arse of party HQ if there's the chance of a career out of it. Also watch for those not party affiliated with an Auntie in Fianna Fail....

coolemon

You just have to look at the leadership of the student unions. Careerist carpet baggers.

youngpolitico

So are we basically saying do nothing because there is no point?

Annasopra

youngpolitico wrote: »

I understand a lot of people are involved in political parties and that a lot of young people do vote, but do you not think that they are strong armed by the hierarchy in these parties and don't actually get their views and ideas across because they must follow the party line? I'm not arguing here I'm just looking for feedback. I think if their was a new, fresh party, it would be good for the country.

My experience of young people in parties is that they are definitely not "strong armed" by the parties.

Annasopra

coolemon wrote: »

You just have to look at the leadership of the student unions. Careerist carpet baggers.

From my own involvement in student politics I met some assholes and many many genuine hardworking SU people.

Annasopra

youngpolitico wrote: »

So are we basically saying do nothing because there is no point?

Im just not sure if a party would work. If it is aimed solely at young people then what happens when the activists reach their thirties.

youngpolitico

I think student politics is a lot different to national politics.

Robroy36

youngpolitico wrote: »

Hi all,

Ireland has some of the best universities in the world

No, it does not. The Irish university system is fine but none of them are even close to being described as "the best universities in the world".

youngpolitico

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

Im just not sure if a party would work. If it is aimed solely at young people then what happens when the activists reach their thirties.

I'm not saying it would have to be solely young people. More like a young party. Brand new, a new opinion on things. But yes I think people in their 20s in this country would be well capable of setting up such a party and making it work.

youngpolitico

Robroy36 wrote: »

No, it does not. The Irish university system is fine but none of them are even close to being described as "the best universities in the world".

Trinity is ranked 71st and UCD is ranked 139th. All of our universities are ranked in the top 650 globally and considering the small amount of universities we have and the size of our population I think that is pretty impressive to be honest. You might think differently.

coolemon

youngpolitico wrote: »

So are we basically saying do nothing because there is no point?

There is more to politics and political change than running in elections. To make real qualitative change people need to start demanding radical alternatives.

We can start with demanding democracy rather than oligarchy. Demand number one.

A second republic. Number two. The ripping up of the existing constitution and its replacement with one fit for the 21st century.

For Forks Sake

Joeytheparrot wrote: »

From my own involvement in student politics I met some assholes and many many genuine hardworking SU people.

Which ones are still involved in politics post-university?

KingBrian2

coolemon wrote: »

There is more to politics and political change than running in elections. To make real qualitative change people need to start demanding radical alternatives.

We can start with demanding democracy rather than oligarchy. Demand number one.

A second republic. Number two. The ripping up of the existing constitution and its replacement with one fit for the 21st century.

Vey good with the sound bites, since nobody is considering revolutionary endeavours it would seem counter productive to be advocating a second republic. No one is calling for Paris style student riots which ended that countries Republic. It might be catchy to go on about the lack of democracy and the oligarchy but in reality this country is pretty well governed on the whole. We don't even have a right wing party like other countries so the talk of revolution is a bit too dramatic.

In Spain or Greece the government is genuinely right wing and ideas of democracy are very notional. For example the Spanish governments proposal to ban demonstrations now compare that to Ireland in which not only are demonstrations allowable but we allow just about anyone organise a march against minor taxation increases. I don't see Garda beating the crap out of pedestrians or cyclists for breaking the many traffic violations thankfully.

Annasopra

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Which ones are still involved in politics post-university?

Some of each.

youngpolitico

I came across Lucinda Creighton on Vincent Browne last night. She is starting a new party and I will be supporting it. Thanks for your feedback.

Playboy

No more parliamentary voting. Everyone should vote on every issue or bill via the internet.

youngpolitico

Playboy wrote: »

No more parliamentary voting. Everyone should vote on every issue or bill via the internet.

No offence but that's just a bit silly.

Playboy

youngpolitico wrote: »

No offence but that's just a bit silly.

Why? Why do we need representatives to vote for us when they so often vote against our interests and break their promises to the electorate? Politicians are only concerned with the own interests or the interests of corporations or lobby groups. As you say there is a lack of choice when you look at the political parties in most countries today, none of them are worth voting for as none of them represent your interests like they are supposed to.

oscarBravo

Playboy wrote: »

No more parliamentary voting. Everyone should vote on every issue or bill via the internet.

Maybe we could have the votes live on television. With theme music and a celebrity MC.

Playboy

oscarBravo wrote: »

Maybe we could have the votes live on television. With theme music and a celebrity MC.

Would be funny but I am making a serious point. Once we vote for a representative to make decisions on our behalf then we lose control. A Politician can promise us the earth and then renege on those promises and we have to wait for the next election to replace him/her with someone equally as bad. Are the vast majority of issues so complex that we cant decide for ourselves? Given the quality of politicians that this country has been producing for the last few decades then I would trust joe public far more in making a correct decision.

How many bills pass though parliament every year where all representatives vote? It seems like half the time the place is empty.

oscarBravo

Playboy wrote: »

Are the vast majority of issues so complex that we cant decide for ourselves?

Frankly, yes. Do you think any bill raising taxes (other than those on "the rich") or cutting social welfare payments would have a hope in hell of passing?

And that's leaving aside the question of the integrity of the ballot.

Playboy

oscarBravo wrote: »

Frankly, yes. Do you think any bill raising taxes (other than those on "the rich") or cutting social welfare payments would have a hope in hell of passing?

And that's leaving aside the question of the integrity of the ballot.

And why would that be a bad thing if that is what the majority want? The rich should be taxed far more and poor less so. It is exactly this kind of problem which demonstrates why voting ourselves would be a better solution. For too long countries have been slashing taxes for the rich at the expense of the lower and middle classes. This is the one of the main reasons why global inequality has grown so much in recent years.

Obviously the security of the system would be paramount but this is a hypothetical conversation which assumes we can find a solution to that.

BoJack Horseman

Playboy wrote: »

And why would that be a bad thing if that is what the majority want?

Because, absolute total populism will not deliver progress.

You can't run a state if only "someone else" contributes.

Playboy

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Because, absolute total populism will not deliver progress.

You can't run a state if only "someone else" contributes.

I think you underestimate the electorate here. People are smart enough to understand that there has to be a balance.

BoJack Horseman

Playboy wrote: »

I think you underestimate the electorate here. People are smart enough to understand that there has to be a balance.

No.... I think I estimate them just right.

The individual is rational & smart, but people collectively are selfish & irrational.

Ireland isn't an especially high tax economy (36% of GDP approx).

Its hard to deny if each of us were allowed determine our tax contributions, the tax take would collapse..... Ditto for approving large expenditures.

It would catch up eventually.

oscarBravo

Playboy wrote: »

And why would that be a bad thing if that is what the majority want? The rich should be taxed far more and poor less so. It is exactly this kind of problem which demonstrates why voting ourselves would be a better solution. For too long countries have been slashing taxes for the rich at the expense of the lower and middle classes.

I take it you're blissfully unaware of what percentages of total income taxes are paid by what bands of earners in this country. Don't worry, you're far from alone in not knowing that - and that's precisely why your idea would be a catastrophic failure.

Obviously the security of the system would be paramount but this is a hypothetical conversation which assumes we can find a solution to that.

Great. While we're at it, let's have a hypothetical conversation about why we should have a society that's predicated on free, unlimited energy, and just blithely assume that we can find a solution to the fact that such a thing doesn't exist.

If you're going to propose that the country should be run in a particular way, you don't get to hand-wave away the minor technical detail that it's impossible to do so.

Playboy wrote: »

I think you underestimate the electorate here. People are smart enough to understand that there has to be a balance.

In the two and a half decades I've been voting, everything I've seen has indicated precisely the opposite.

coolemon

KingBrian2 wrote: »

since nobody is considering revolutionary endeavours it would seem counter productive to be advocating a second republic.

Firstly, to get a "second republic" would not require revolution. Rather, it requires a new constitution.

Secondly, there are people advocating revolution. Me being one. But that's beside the point.

No one is calling for Paris style student riots which ended that countries Republic.

I am.

but in reality this country is pretty well governed on the whole.

Governed by an oligarchy. If that is "pretty well governed" then good luck to you.

I want democracy. We have an incredibly unequal society and the second highest percentage of low paid jobs in the OECD after the USA.

That's not well governed. That's a ****hole for those on the bottom portion of it.

compare that to Ireland in which not only are demonstrations allowable but we allow just about anyone organise a march against minor taxation increases.

Because the Irish are horse blinkered and subsumed in an ideologically hegemonic English speaking discourse where "the left" barely exists throughout the realm - the UK, the USA, Ireland, Australia, New-Zealand, and so on. Outside of the English speaking world there exists real opposition rather than the faux FF-FG-LP-SF mafia cabal that exists here. And the levels of social inequality reflect that.

Ideas and identity formation are heavily controlled and contained in the English speaking world.

I don't see Garda beating the crap out of pedestrians or cyclists for breaking the many traffic violations thankfully.

They don't need to. Fines and other penalties are used.

Have a walk around Dublin and see if you can spot any communicated political ideas outside of those governed by money.

Murals and political messages are commonplace in France, Spain, Greece and about anywhere else on mainland Europe. Try it here and the Gawrds will come down on you like a tonne of bricks.

You could get away with an awful lot more in France, Spain and Greece in terms of exercising political expression.

Riot is standard practice. And the powers that be will act accordingly.

Playboy

oscarBravo wrote: »

I take it you're blissfully unaware of what percentages of total income taxes are paid by what bands of earners in this country. Don't worry, you're far from alone in not knowing that - and that's precisely why your idea would be a catastrophic failure.

Why would you assume that?

oscarBravo wrote: »

Great. While we're at it, let's have a hypothetical conversation about why we should have a society that's predicated on free, unlimited energy, and just blithely assume that we can find a solution to the fact that such a thing doesn't exist.

because there isn't a massive difference between a secure online voting system and free unlimited energy right?

oscarBravo wrote: »

If you're going to propose that the country should be run in a particular way, you don't get to hand-wave away the minor technical detail that it's impossible to do so.

So we cant discuss alternatives to the current system without having a detailed plan that implementable .. right!

oscarBravo wrote: »

In the two and a half decades I've been voting, everything I've seen has indicated precisely the opposite.

In the nearly two decades (not sure why that matters) I have been voting I have observed corrupt and devious behaviors in the majority of our politicians who seem to be more concerned with self preservation and pandering to corporate interests. A change would be nice

KingBrian2

Playboy wrote: »

How many bills pass though parliament every year where all representatives vote? It seems like half the time the place is empty.

Totally agree with you the place is scarcely inhabited during sessions. TD's should be attending parliament as that is their job. Probably too busy looking after constituencies but what is the point if you barely show up and barely participate in any debates. It is a debating chamber for a reason and arguments are suppose to persuade people to your point of view. It is not supposed to be a echo chamber.

KingBrian2

coolemon wrote: »

Firstly, to get a "second republic" would not require revolution. Rather, it requires a new constitution.

Secondly, there are people advocating revolution. Me being one. But that's beside the point.



I am.



Governed by an oligarchy. If that is "pretty well governed" then good luck to you.

I want democracy. We have an incredibly unequal society and the second highest percentage of low paid jobs in the OECD after the USA.

That's not well governed. That's a ****hole for those on the bottom portion of it.



Because the Irish are horse blinkered and subsumed in an ideologically hegemonic English speaking discourse where "the left" barely exists throughout the realm - the UK, the USA, Ireland, Australia, New-Zealand, and so on. Outside of the English speaking world there exists real opposition rather than the faux FF-FG-LP-SF mafia cabal that exists here. And the levels of social inequality reflect that.

Ideas and identity formation are heavily controlled and contained in the English speaking world.



They don't need to. Fines and other penalties are used.

Have a walk around Dublin and see if you can spot any communicated political ideas outside of those governed by money.

Murals and political messages are commonplace in France, Spain, Greece and about anywhere else on mainland Europe. Try it here and the Gawrds will come down on you like a tonne of bricks.

You could get away with an awful lot more in France, Spain and Greece in terms of exercising political expression.

Riot is standard practice. And the powers that be will act accordingly.

Calm down I agree with some of your views but not all. Democracy is completely different to inequality. Britain is a democracy though it is deeply unequal unlike the rest of Europe which is why I admire European countries like Germany, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands, Belgium and so on. They all appreciate the importance of social welfare. Irish lack of democracy as you put it is down to selfishness on the part of politicians who pander to voters instead of defending Irish interests. I would opt for the social model practised by this countries but Irish politicians prefer voter friendly gestures.

oscarBravo

Playboy wrote: »

Why would you assume that?

Because you seem to assume that the lower paid pay a disproportionate share of taxes.

because there isn't a massive difference between a secure online voting system and free unlimited energy right?

Well, neither is currently feasible, so we may as well base a discussion on one than the other.

So we cant discuss alternatives to the current system without having a detailed plan that implementable .. right!

I'd settle for "vaguely plausible" for starters.

In the nearly two decades (not sure why that matters) I have been voting I have observed corrupt and devious behaviors in the majority of our politicians who seem to be more concerned with self preservation and pandering to corporate interests. A change would be nice

That's the tired trope that any change from a bad situation would necessarily be an improvement. It's like saying "something must be done; this is something, therefore this must be done" - there's a gaping chasm in the logic involved.

Playboy

oscarBravo wrote: »

Because you seem to assume that the lower paid pay a disproportionate share of taxes.

Where did I assume that? What I know is that a small minority have a vastly unequal share of resources, more in fact than they will ever be able to spend in lifetimes. Taxation is one method for reducing that inequality

OscarBravo wrote:

Well, neither is currently feasible, so we may as well base a discussion on one than the other. I'd settle for "vaguely plausible" for starters.

Sure.. One isn't more plausible than the other. It's not like we don't have any security online, that we don't process billions ever day in online payments?

oscarBravo wrote:

That's the tired trope that any change from a bad situation would necessarily be an improvement. It's like saying "something must be done; this is something, therefore this must be done" - there's a gaping chasm in the logic involved.

So this is as good as it gets? Why are you afraid of discussing or exploring alternatives... Just dismiss them outright because radical change is unrealistic?

oscarBravo

Playboy wrote: »

Sure.. One isn't more plausible than the other. It's not like we don't have any security online, that we don't process billions ever day in online payments?

Online voting isn't the same thing as online banking. If you think it is, it's because you haven't thought about the problem.

So this is as good as it gets?

I didn't say that.

Why are you afraid of discussing or exploring alternatives... Just dismiss them outright because radical change is unrealistic?

We are discussing one alternative. Discussing doesn't mean uncritically accepting a deeply flawed proposal.

Your idea is unworkable in practice, because secure voting over the Internet is, if not impossible, then at least completely infeasible - if you disagree, then the onus is on you to outline a voting system that's immune to the very many attacks to which it would be subjected - and undesirable in principle, because the idea that every citizen is sufficiently engaged and informed to vote on every proposal is, frankly, ludicrous.

micosoft

youngpolitico wrote: »

I'm not saying it would have to be solely young people. More like a young party. Brand new, a new opinion on things. But yes I think people in their 20s in this country would be well capable of setting up such a party and making it work.

The fact they haven't would indicate otherwise.

And you've now moved to a "young party". The reason why new parties are not appearing in Ireland has been done to death but fundamentally there is no demand for one from the electorate.

micosoft

oscarBravo wrote: »

That's the tired trope that any change from a bad situation would necessarily be an improvement. It's like saying "something must be done; this is something, therefore this must be done" - there's a gaping chasm in the logic involved.

This! It's the actual answer to most of the "ideas" and "changes" raised in Politics forum. Because despite what some people think, it's ALWAYS possible to make a situation worse. Especially if it clearly has not been thought through.

micosoft

Playboy wrote: »

In the nearly two decades (not sure why that matters) I have been voting I have observed corrupt and devious behaviors in the majority of our politicians who seem to be more concerned with self preservation and pandering to corporate interests. A change would be nice

And who knowingly votes in these corrupt politicians? I see Michael Lowry being elected in again and again by the good burghers of Tipperary. Perhaps we should look at the corrupt and devious behaviours of our electorate who deliberately vote in hucksters with an eye on getting something for nothing from the state. Maybe, just maybe if we started a discussion on how we can make the electorate accountable for their nearly criminal decisions (42% voted for FF in 2007 lest we forget) we might see a change in Irish politics. But tinkering with the means of democracy won't solve the fundamental issue in Ireland - the electorate that votes them in.

laoch na mona

youngpolitico wrote: »

I came across Lucinda Creighton on Vincent Browne last night. She is starting a new party and I will be supporting it. Thanks for your feedback.

wait I thought you were unhappy with established parties, but you're going to join continuity Fine Gael?

plenty of young people are politically active many just aren't into student politics, to what degree they are in it for the career varies from party to party (as you would expect since some parties are more suited to careerists).

VinLieger

The main problem with a young persons party surely is obvious isn't it? People get older and their views on the world change depending on their age, unless you are going to impose an age limit of who can run and be a member of such a party the whole thing is pointless as it will just end up being full or old men who haven't a clue how young people think

hmmm

The reason we have a representative system of democracy, rather than everyone voting on every issue, is that most people do not have the time to spend looking through issues and bills in details - whereas the politicians we elect do. If everyone voted on every issue, you'd end up with people with an incredibly superficial understanding of issues voting on something they don't understand, and they'd probably end up relying on what they were told to do by some talking heads in the media.

Another issue raised in this thread is that the "rich" are under-taxed. Tell that to someone on 36k a year, who has to pay 52 cents of every euro they earn to the government, not to mention property tax, tv license, motor tax, bin charges etc. The problem with the Irish tax system is the massive clump of people who pay nothing.

laoch na mona

36k is not rich, progressive tax based on income is the most logical way to create equality by ensure those who can afford to pay more do so

Yiikes

coolemon wrote: »

You just have to look at the leadership of the student unions. Careerist carpet baggers.

Just last week UCC SU steamrolled a vote on our membership of USI. It was quite sickening to watch as only 15% of students voted. I had no idea there was a vote until the voting started. I like to be informed but there was no unbiased material from the SU. There was no "No" side visible on campus. How they claim to represent students is laughable. Puts you right off student politics unless you are a member of it. Doubt they have a positive effect in increasing student interest in actual politics. Doubt Ill bother voting on SU matters anymore while in UCC, bad habit to get into as a young adult but Ill be in the majority of being apathetic.

ezra_pound

hmmm wrote: »

The reason we have a representative system of democracy, rather than everyone voting on every issue, is that most people do not have the time to spend looking through issues and bills in details - whereas the politicians we elect do. If everyone voted on every issue, you'd end up with people with an incredibly superficial understanding of issues voting on something they don't understand, and they'd probably end up relying on what they were told to do by some talking heads in the media.

Another issue raised in this thread is that the "rich" are under-taxed. Tell that to someone on 36k a year, who has to pay 52 cents of every euro they earn to the government, not to mention property tax, tv license, motor tax, bin charges etc. The problem with the Irish tax system is the massive clump of people who pay nothing.

On 36 k you don't pay near 52c on every euro earned.

BoJack Horseman

ezra_pound wrote: »

On 36 k you don't pay near 52c on every euro earned.

Indeed, its around 20% on that wage.

(Plus a €400 income tax decrease for the year 2015 vs 2014)

For Reals

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Indeed, its around 20% on that wage.

(Plus a €400 income dax decrease for the year 2015 vs 2014)

A decrease in Dax Sheppard? Nice.

laoch na mona

Yiikes wrote: »

Just last week UCC SU steamrolled a vote on our membership of USI. It was quite sickening to watch as only 15% of students voted. I had no idea there was a vote until the voting started. I like to be informed but there was no unbiased material from the SU. There was no "No" side visible on campus. How they claim to represent students is laughable. Puts you right off student politics unless you are a member of it. Doubt they have a positive effect in increasing student interest in actual politics. Doubt Ill bother voting on SU matters anymore while in UCC, bad habit to get into as a young adult but Ill be in the majority of being apathetic.

surely its up to the no side to make themselves visible? on what grounds were they looking to leave the usi?

p1akuw47h5r3it

laoch na mona wrote: »

surely its up to the no side to make themselves visible? on what grounds were they looking to leave the usi?

Probably on the grounds that the USI is a gigantic waste of time and money.