What's your ideal political party? I'm libetarian.

Son of a bitch

My party is a party that focuses on both personal freedoms but also personal responsibilities.

People should be free to make their own decisions but face the consequences themselves. I believe that people should be able to do what they want (as long as it doesn't harm another person or society in general.

I believe in legalisation of drugs and relaxation of licensing laws for alcohol.
I believe in free trade.
I also believe in severe punishments for those that harm others or try to inhibit their freedoms.

Basically, you can do what you want when you want as long as no one else is harmed in the progress, anything you do to fuck up your own body, you pay the consequences.

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

Son of a bitch

jacksie66 wrote: »

Libertarianism basically..

Yes. Apologies, I meant to post that in the OP.

Akrasia

Son of a bitch wrote: »

Yes. Apologies, I meant to post that in the OP.

Libertarianism also entails low tax, low social spending, small government

What happens when people suffer misfortune beyond their own control, like if they responsibly plan a family but have a baby with profound special needs requiring life long intense and expensive care?

Son of a bitch

Akrasia wrote: »

Libertarianism also entails low tax, low social spending, small government

What happens when people suffer misfortune beyond their own control, like if they responsibly plan a family but have a baby with profound special needs requiring life long intense and expensive care?

I believe in fair and equitable taxation and safety nets for those who need it. But I do believe in pulling the rug from those who abuse the system.

If people who are "homeless" and they refuse a home based on frivolous grounds, they should be told to jump in a lake. If people are genuinely homeless, they should be happy with a small apartment (one bathroom, one kitchen and a living/bedroom combined).

mcmoustache

The Progressive Democrats from a long time ago were probably the closest that you would get in Ireland. They were fiscally conservative and favoured personal responsibility over the nanny state. They didn't strike me as socially conservative at the time either. It's a pity that they went extinct because they were a much needed voice on the right of the political spectrum.

James Brown

mcmoustache wrote: »

The Progressive Democrats from a long time ago were probably the closest that you would get in Ireland. They were fiscally conservative and favoured personal responsibility over the nanny state. They didn't strike me as socially conservative at the time either. It's a pity that they went extinct because they were a much needed voice on the right of the political spectrum.

On paper they sound reasonable, but Mary Harney's track record would beg to differ.

View

Son of a bitch wrote: »

Akrasia wrote: »

Libertarianism also entails low tax, low social spending, small government

What happens when people suffer misfortune beyond their own control, like if they responsibly plan a family but have a baby with profound special needs requiring life long intense and expensive care?

I believe in fair and equitable taxation and safety nets for those who need it. But I do believe in pulling the rug from those who abuse the system.

If people who are "homeless" and they refuse a home based on frivolous grounds, they should be told to jump in a lake. If people are genuinely homeless, they should be happy with a small apartment (one bathroom, one kitchen and a living/bedroom combined).

If you believe in safety nets, you don’t believe in Libertarianism. Safety nets are expensive and incompatible with “low tax, low social spending, small government“. It is an either/or choice not a both/and one.

Tabnabs

View wrote: »

If you believe in safety nets, you don’t believe in Libertarianism. Safety nets are expensive and incompatible with “low tax, low social spending, small government“. It is an either/or choice not a both/and one.

8 posts in before the libertarian police turned up, not bad for an Irish political forum.

mcmoustache

Matt Barrett wrote: »

On paper they sound reasonable, but Mary Harney's track record would beg to differ.

In fairness, they were a minority coalition partner in a country with an electorate that likes socialist (in the european sense) policies.

realdanbreen

Son of a bitch wrote: »

My party is a party that focuses on both personal freedoms but also personal responsibilities.

People should be free to make their own decisions but face the consequences themselves. I believe that people should be able to do what they want (as long as it doesn't harm another person or society in general.

I believe in legalisation of drugs and relaxation of licensing laws for alcohol.
I believe in free trade.
I also believe in severe punishments for those that harm others or try to inhibit their freedoms.

Basically, you can do what you want when you want as long as no one else is harmed in the progress, anything you do to fuck up your own body, you pay the consequences.

How many councillors or TD's have ye got?

troyzer

There is no such as a real libertarian and you've shown already that you aren't one by believing in a safety net which is by far the largest part of the state and the one which consumes the most taxes. You are accepting the principle that the state has a responsibility to guarantee a minimum standard of welfare, you can't accept that and also be a libertarian.

I'm a Social Democrat and I was one before the party was established.

View

Tabnabs wrote: »

View wrote: »

If you believe in safety nets, you don’t believe in Libertarianism. Safety nets are expensive and incompatible with “low tax, low social spending, small government“. It is an either/or choice not a both/and one.

8 posts in before the libertarian police turned up, not bad for an Irish political forum.

I amn’t a libertarian, much less the “libertarian police”. I merely pointed out the contradiction in the OPs post.

He sounds like many of our “typical” conservatives, some of whom even masquerade as being “progressive” or “left wing”, but who basically want the state to provide us with safety nets/services while regarding it as outrageous that they come with a bill attached.

brevity

It sounds great on paper but the implementation seems rather ruthless. Some of the voices I've heard on it talk about removing government regulations and leave the market decide. Which is flawed beyond belief.

Tabnabs

View wrote: »

I amn’t a libertarian, much less the “libertarian police”. I merely pointed out the contradiction in the OPs post.

He sounds like many of our “typical” conservatives, some of whom even masquerade as being “progressive” or “left wing”, but who basically want the state to provide us with safety nets/services while regarding it as outrageous that they come with a bill attached.

Libertarians are not some homogeneous group with a strict doctrine. The degrees of variation are really no different than most other political philosophies.

James Brown

mcmoustache wrote: »

In fairness, they were a minority coalition partner in a country with an electorate that likes socialist (in the european sense) policies.

Harney's record was her own making.
Just pointing out that any feigned ideology can often differ from the reality. Ahern considered himself socialist for example. Both are guilty of putting the public low down on the list of priorities.

View

Tabnabs wrote: »

View wrote: »

I amn’t a libertarian, much less the “libertarian police”. I merely pointed out the contradiction in the OPs post.

He sounds like many of our “typical” conservatives, some of whom even masquerade as being “progressive” or “left wing”, but who basically want the state to provide us with safety nets/services while regarding it as outrageous that they come with a bill attached.

Libertarians are not some homogeneous group with a strict doctrine. The degrees of variation are really no different than most other political philosophies.

I fully accept that but at the same time there is any political belief a loosely defined central core. If you “stray” from that, you clearly aren’t an adherent of that belief system even if you want to think you are.

It reminds me of the long time Labour Party activist who said over the years he was approached by lots of people who declared they were “socialists”, who then proceeded to denigrate the Labour Party as not being “socialist” enough and then, in the next breath, announced they’d vote for Fianna Fáil instead (when it, as the then most successful party, was, and had every reason to be, conservative (as it was the primary electoral beneficiary of the then current system)).

Loafing Oaf

mcmoustache wrote: »

In fairness, they were a minority coalition partner in a country with an electorate that likes socialist (in the european sense) policies.

They carved out a truly unenviable niche for themselves in terms of electoral success: were labelled as Thatcherite but were part of a government that presided over massive increases in public spending. So the 90+% that rejected 'right-wing' economic policies would never vote for them, and the small minority who favoured such policies would likely see them as no better than the rest of the parties...

DickSwiveller Returns

At the moment we basically have a one party State: The business party + a few loons on the far left and the Healy Rae's. The business party known the price of everything and the value of nothing. As they are stuffed with metropolitan trendies, they are completely obsessed with political correctness and being seen as the most hip, trendy down-with-the-kids party around. Personally, I would like an anti-political correctness party. One that' not afraid to speak its mind and upset the establishment.

Squatter

troyzer wrote: »

I'm a Social Democrat and I was one before the party was established.

So are you a member of the eponymous political party?

If so, then presumably you believe that the two-headed leadership of the political party that calls itself The Social Democrats are genuine social democrats; and that it's not just a convenient name that the founding members decided to use?

Is Stephen Donnelly still a social democrat or by joining FF did he automatically disqualify himself from being allowed to call himself one?

Pat Mustard

Son of a bitch wrote: »

Basically, you can do what you want when you want as long as no one else is harmed in the progress, anything you do to fuck up your own body, you pay the consequences.

The USA lacks a "social safety net". Wealthy people and people with good incomes do okay.

Just don't ever get sick if you can't pay for your mortgage, bills and health insurance.

It's not ideal for young families or older people and not an ideal way to live when there are better options.

DeadHand

Nationalist, sovereignty and self determination being paramount, low tax, high personal liberty along with high personal responsibility, minimal quangos, anti-PC, EU sceptical, immigration realist (minimal overall, to satisy national needs only, zero unskilled labour from outside the EU), anti-Islamification, overhaul car insurance and tax making it cheaper to drive, overhaul our asylum system (ie. take zero asylum seekers until war breaks out in the UK or continental Europe).

I wouldn’t just vote for them, I’d join and campaign actively.

Such a party, well run, would be a major force and eventually gain power.

Loafing Oaf

DeadHand wrote: »

Such a party, well run, would be a major force and eventually gain power.

And yet nothing is being done to establish such a party. Strange that there's this huge gap in the political market but no effort is being made to fill it...

For Forks Sake

DeadHand wrote: »

high personal responsibility

That'll not fly in this country, everything's de gubbermints fault :rolleyes:

Squatter

DeadHand wrote: »

Nationalist, sovereignty and self determination being paramount, low tax, high personal liberty along with high personal responsibility, minimal quangos, anti-PC, EU sceptical, immigration realist (minimal overall, to satisy national needs only, zero unskilled labour from outside the EU), anti-Islamification, overhaul car insurance and tax making it cheaper to drive, overhaul our asylum system (ie. take zero asylum seekers until war breaks out in the UK or continental Europe).

I wouldn’t just vote for them, I’d join and campaign actively.

Such a party, well run, would be a major force and eventually gain power.

RTE and the "Dublin meejia" would destroy it before it got off the ground.

Mutant z

One that actually gives a fig about what the public want because all the rest couldn't care less.

DeadHand

Squatter wrote: »

RTE and the "Dublin meejia" would destroy it before it got off the ground.

I should add, another element of my fantasy manifesto is to withdraw public funding for RTÉ and scrap the wildly unpopular, oft evaded TV license.

The whole incestuous, propaganda machine would go belly up before long.

An Ciarraioch

Squatter wrote: »

RTE and the "Dublin meejia" would destroy it before it got off the ground.

There's the National Party, of course, and there was the Immigration Control Platform previously. Personally, as a person of the centre-left, the only realistic option on that front would appear a Labour-Green-SD merger.

B0jangles

Can't see a Libertarian party taking off here largely because most libertarians I've come across seem to have a very poor regard for other people, and who tend to only be interested in their own personal well-being.

How do you form a party composed entirely of extremely selfish people?
Surely that alone makes any kind of collective action impossible?

20Cent

Time to pull out this classic post about libertarianism.

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2056435210/1/#post75190058



I'd like a Bernie Sanders democratic socialist type party myself.

johnnyskeleton

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

At the moment we basically have a one party State: The business party + a few loons on the far left and the Healy Rae's.

We have Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour and Sinn Fein. Leaving aside any debate on the latter on whether they are actually left wing or not, you would hardly describe them as a few loons on the far left. Which one do you describe as the party of busines that is running our one party state? You do know that our current government is a minority government with support from independents. That is the very opposite of what you get in a one party state.

The business party known the price of everything and the value of nothing.

Known by whom? I would in any event contend that the centrist parties may be dull and not overly efficient, but the radical populists elected across the world are worse IMO. Better to know the price of everything and the value of nothing than to not know the price of anything and actively detest the value of everything.

As they are stuffed with metropolitan trendies, they are completely obsessed with political correctness and being seen as the most hip, trendy down-with-the-kids party around. Personally, I would like an anti-political correctness party. One that' not afraid to speak its mind and upset the establishment.

We had a constitutional referendum this year that suggests that a lot of our elected representatives are far from the metropolitan triendies completely obsessed with political correctness as you describe.

I find politicians who claim to be anti establishment are generally tilting at windmills. Once they are elected, then they are the new establishment. So whata their next trick?

DickSwiveller Returns

johnnyskeleton;107651279]We have Fianna Fail, Fine Gael, Labour and Sinn Fein. Leaving aside any debate on the latter on whether they are actually left wing or not, you would hardly describe them as a few loons on the far left. Which one do you describe as the party of busines that is running our one party state? You do know that our current government is a minority government with support from independents. That is the very opposite of what you get in a one party state.

I would say the 4 you've mentioned are pretty much the same. Sinn Féin act like they're different but I'm not sure they'd differ policy-wise if they were in government. I would describe them all as business parties. They have no clear policies or principals and will just go along with what the business community wants. The big problem we have in Ireland is that there is barely an opposition, except from people before profit/social democrats, who, tbf do try and hold the government to account.

Known by whom? I would in any event contend that the centrist parties may be dull and not overly efficient, but the radical populists elected across the world are worse IMO. Better to know the price of everything and the value of nothing than to not know the price of anything and actively detest the value of everything.

I suppose that is true but it makes for very boring politics.

We had a constitutional referendum this year that suggests that a lot of our elected representatives are far from the metropolitan triendies completely obsessed with political correctness as you describe.

No, but many seem to think their role in public life is to attend Pride parades, engage in vapid self serving PR on twitter etc. Can anyone remember the last time they actually did anything else?

I find politicians who claim to be anti establishment are generally tilting at windmills. Once they are elected, then they are the new establishment. So whata their next trick?

Agreed

troyzer

Squatter wrote: »

So are you a member of the eponymous political party?

If so, then presumably you believe that the two-headed leadership of the political party that calls itself The Social Democrats are genuine social democrats; and that it's not just a convenient name that the founding members decided to use?

Is Stephen Donnelly still a social democrat or by joining FF did he automatically disqualify himself from being allowed to call himself one?

I am a member, yeah.

Social democratic parties across Europe call themselves the Social Democrats but I agree it causes a few issues in a multi party democracy like Ireland. Stephen Donnelly is probably still a social democrat but not a Social Democrat with capital letters if you know what I mean. They have the same thing in the UK with conservatives vs Conservatives.

The platform is pretty bog standard social democracy.

BabyCheeses

Something to the centre left but there is always something I don't like about the party.

Squatter wrote: »

RTE and the "Dublin meejia" would destroy it before it got off the ground.

So much for that party of personal responsibility!

Jolly Red Giant

An Ciarraioch wrote: »

There's the National Party, of course, and there was the Immigration Control Platform previously. Personally, as a person of the centre-left, the only realistic option on that front would appear a Labour-Green-SD merger.

Just to point out that non of the LP-GP-SD could be described as 'centre-left'

CrabRevolution

DeadHand wrote: »

Nationalist, sovereignty and self determination being paramount, low tax, high personal liberty along with high personal responsibility, minimal quangos, anti-PC, EU sceptical, immigration realist (minimal overall, to satisy national needs only, zero unskilled labour from outside the EU), anti-Islamification, overhaul car insurance and tax making it cheaper to drive, overhaul our asylum system (ie. take zero asylum seekers until war breaks out in the UK or continental Europe).

I wouldn’t just vote for them, I’d join and campaign actively.

Such a party, well run, would be a major force and eventually gain power.

Would the first step in becoming a major force and gaining power not be to form as a party?



Surely it's telling that not only is no such party in power, but no such party is in opposition, no such party is running for election, and most tellingly of all, no such party even exists?

johnnyskeleton

DickSwiveller Returns wrote: »

I would say the 4 you've mentioned are pretty much the same. Sinn Féin act like they're different but I'm not sure they'd differ policy-wise if they were in government. I would describe them all as business parties. They have no clear policies or principals and will just go along with what the business community wants. The big problem we have in Ireland is that there is barely an opposition, except from people before profit/social democrats, who, tbf do try and hold the government to account.

If these parties are all in hoc to busines, then why do they have social welfare, minimum wage, public education and health, medium to high personal tax rates etc?

Im not saying that there arent significant issues with cosy relationships between certain politicians and businesses, nor would i deny that our tax and regulatory systems are designed to try to attract and keep businesses here, but these are all practical decisions designed to bring Ireland from a rural backwater to a country with a high standard of living. And that seems to work, which is why few political parties offer much different.

Isuppose that is true but it makes for very boring politics.

No, but many seem to think their role in public life is to attend Pride parades, engage in vapid self serving PR on twitter etc. Can anyone remember the last time they actually did anything else?

Agreed

I think this sums up quite nicely one of the big problems. When the status quo is the best we can practical do, and far from perfect, people get unhappy and desire change, even change that is bad for us.

It is important to remember that things can get much worse, which is why radical change is thankfully not wamted by the majority of the Irish people. Instead, we want our politicians to try to do better in the same system.

johnnyskeleton

Jolly Red Giant wrote: »

Just to point out that non of the LP-GP-SD could be described as 'centre-left'

What else would you call them and by what metric do you judge them?

tim3000

I believe in personal freedoms but wouldn't class myself as a libertarian. I believe that it is the states primary role to care for its citizens in terms of health education and infrastructure/environment.

I think those nordic countries have the right formula, excellent standard of living but with extermely high taxes l. These would be a hard pill for some to swallow. But I think the standard of living would balance this out in the long run. I cant imagine that kind of model taking off here however.

Regarding other posters claims that we are a one party state, I would tend to agree. If you were to ask me the central differences between FF and FG I couldn't even begin to differentiate. Id imagine this is a similar situation most of my generation and younger would be in. Its not due to lack of interest per se but more disengagement and disenfranchisement with these parties. That coupled with the fact there is zero accountability, which to the best of my knowledge is not something faced by these nordic countries.

Dr Brown

The biggest issue facing Ireland right now is mass Immigration.

It affects all areas of life from housing, jobs, education, health, transport and of course crime.

It's not the economy stupid its Immigration.

I would vote for any party that is serious about stopping mass Immigration.