Liam Cosgrave RIP

kk.man · 04-10-2017 10:27pm #1

Mr. Cosgrave was a pure gentleman of the old stock and gave politicians a honest decent name.

blanch152 · 04-10-2017 11:02pm

His views on contraception and women's rights were outdated, even by his time.

However, to his eternal credit, he stood strong against the IRA and its ilk during a time when this State was under threat from those terrorists. For that he will be remembered as a good Taoiseach.

05-10-2017 1:41pm

What exactly does "old stock" mean?

He was an average, or below-average-performing Taoiseach. He was Fine Gael's DeValera, except lacking DeValera's imagination (thankfully).

I don't really think it's relevant whether he tipped his cap to ladies in that exaggerated/ affected way, if that's what you mean by 'gentleman of the old stock'.

kk.man · 05-10-2017 2:19pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

What exactly does "old stock" mean?

He was an average, or below-average-performing Taoiseach. He was Fine Gael's DeValera, except lacking DeValera's imagination (thankfully).

I don't really think it's relevant whether he tipped his cap to ladies in that exaggerated/ affected way, if that's what you mean by 'gentleman of the old stock'.

Whatever you decide...Dont believe the man did any harm to you and sadly he has just past on. Have some respect, if that's possible.

05-10-2017 3:42pm

kk.man wrote: »

Whatever you decide...Dont believe the man did any harm to you and sadly he has just past on. Have some respect, if that's possible.

Nor have I done any harm to him personally. I'm talking about his role in political life, which can be characterized as positive only in the sense that is was characterised by inertia and lack of imagination.

we haven't had a similarly regressive Taoiseach in the history of the State, with the exception of DeValera; and even DeValera's reputation in this regard is mitigated by his constructive imagination in other areas (social policy, Fundamental Rights/ the Rule of Law in the 1937 Constitution, etc.)

blanch152 · 05-10-2017 4:29pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Nor have I done any harm to him personally. I'm talking about his role in political life, which can be characterized as positive only in the sense that is was characterised by inertia and lack of imagination.

we haven't had a similarly regressive Taoiseach in the history of the State, with the exception of DeValera; and even DeValera's reputation in this regard is mitigated by his constructive imagination in other areas (social policy, Fundamental Rights/ the Rule of Law in the 1937 Constitution, etc.)

Cosgrave was Taoiseach at a time when the economy was in crisis which he managed well but also at a time when the existence of the State was threatened by subversive IRA terrorists. Even during World War II, we didn't face the same threat. By being so resolute in the face of such a threat, Cosgrave performed his role admirably.

kk.man · 05-10-2017 4:45pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Nor have I done any harm to him personally. I'm talking about his role in political life, which can be characterized as positive only in the sense that is was characterised by inertia and lack of imagination.

we haven't had a similarly regressive Taoiseach in the history of the State, with the exception of DeValera; and even DeValera's reputation in this regard is mitigated by his constructive imagination in other areas (social policy, Fundamental Rights/ the Rule of Law in the 1937 Constitution, etc.)

The same social policy that led to the economic war with the UK which almost bankrupt the country and the 'commonly maidens' theory of policitial vision.

05-10-2017 6:07pm

blanch152 wrote: »

Cosgrave was Taoiseach at a time when the economy was in crisis which he managed well

He managed well?

Er, he most certainly didn't. Liam Cosgrave has the dubious distinction of being the first Taoiseach to lead a Government that was intent on deficit-spending.

He was a Keynesian without having the purse of a Keynesian, nor apparently even knowledge of what Keynesianism entailed ... it made no sense for a small, open economy like Ireland, at that time.

Can you please give details as to what you mean when you celebrate his policies, which were carried on, quite disastrously, by Lynch and FitzGerald after him?

There have been plenty of lovely, quite well-deserved, positive things said about Liam Cosgrave today. And that is only right and proper.

But you won't hear many people -- at least, those who know their economics/ economic history -- saying that Cosgrave's Government managed the economy well.

kk.man wrote: »

The same social policy that led to the economic war with the UK which...

Social policy is not the same as economic policy. I would specifically reference the extremely self-confident construction of thousands of social houses by the De Valera Governments, who practically cleared the slums of Ireland. The same policy was (among the?) first in Europe in allowing, and encouraging, social-housing tenants to buy their own homes.

By the way, DeValera had a disastrous influence on this country, in case anyone thinks I'm an apologist for his legacy. I just recognize that, for all his faults, he did have conviction, and deserves recognition for some of his social policies, as well as the institution of our 1937 constitution with it's remarkably liberal attitude towards individual freedom and fundamental human rights, at a time when the rest of Europe was declining into tyranny and totalitarianism.

Danzy · 05-10-2017 6:14pm

An inflexible control freak with a very poor economic vision for the country at a time of great crisis.

Esel · 05-10-2017 6:19pm

Was the Heavy Gang brought into being under his watch?

kk.man · 05-10-2017 11:28pm

The real disaster of the 1970s came from the FF manifesto of 1977 which plunged this country into economic hardship that resulted in a lost decade for the 1980s.
Dev was an extremely closed minded politician with populist policies. There is Archbishop Mc Quaid influence in the 1937 constitution together with growing influence of church and state controls on our society. Unfortunately led the institutional crisis of which have been recently exposed.
Cosgrave short time in power dealt with the explosion of the troubles and the oil crisis of which he proved a safe pair of hands. He had no Irish Press or school book texts to enhance his reputation.

James Brown · 06-10-2017 3:00pm

Esel wrote: »

Was the Heavy Gang brought into being under his watch?

Looks like it was okay to pick people up off the street to beat and torture them if you 'knew' they did something, even if the available evidence was to the contrary.
I suppose that's what the British forces were doing up in the North, so monkey see, monkey do.

FrancieBrady · 07-10-2017 12:24pm

Despite attempts to elevate his political contribution way above what it actually was, he was an average Taoiseach and politician.

He was typical FG too - talk the high moral talk but stoop as low as the 'Heavy Gang' when it suited. That chapter in our history was a pretty despicable one and Irish people need to be constantly reminded of it. Especially those who routinely climb up onto the higher moral ground.

I know nothing of him personally but he seems to have been an amicable enough man. Sympathy to his family on his loss.

Manach · 07-10-2017 12:40pm

May he RIP. The 70s were a time of economic chaos, political turmoil and various hot incidents during the Cold War. Mr. Cosgrave seemed to have steered a steady course as possible during his tenure in this environment as Ireland was buffeted by these trends. Criticism based on him not meeting the exalted standards on todays enlightened times, part and parcel of such times.

FrancieBrady · 07-10-2017 12:55pm

Manach wrote: »

May he RIP. The 70s were a time of economic chaos, political turmoil and various hot incidents during the Cold War. Mr. Cosgrave seemed to have steered a steady course as possible during his tenure in this environment as Ireland was buffeted by these trends. Criticism based on him not meeting the exalted standards on todays enlightened times, part and parcel of such times.

Off topic maybe. But I love this excusing of some. Others are vilified for their past behaviours/actions, some get the 'they were different times' dilution.
Those responsible for unleashing the 'Heavy Gang' or turning a blind eye to what they did should have done jail imo.

elperello · 07-10-2017 1:10pm

RIP and condolences to family.

The Heavy Gang era is a blot on the record of all responsible.
It's never a good idea for politicians to give a sense of invincibility to security forces.
Some of our current policing difficulties are rooted in that period.
It would however be unfair to blame Liam Cosgrave and his colleagues entirely.
Other politicians had many opportunities to put proper structures and checks and balances in place but they failed.

Brian? · 09-10-2017 8:46am

Manach wrote: »

May he RIP. The 70s were a time of economic chaos, political turmoil and various hot incidents during the Cold War. Mr. Cosgrave seemed to have steered a steady course as possible during his tenure in this environment as Ireland was buffeted by these trends. Criticism based on him not meeting the exalted standards on todays enlightened times, part and parcel of such times.

But he was a dinosaur for his own time. His own government introduced legislation to the Dáil legalising contraception for married couples, he voted against it. Just one point on which he should be vilified. He was a man of conviction alright, but there was nothing to admired about his convictions.

blanch152 · 09-10-2017 8:59am

Brian? wrote: »

But he was a dinosaur for his own time. His own government introduced legislation to the Dáil legalising contraception for married couples, he voted against it. Just one point on which he should be vilified. He was a man of conviction alright, but there was nothing to admired about his convictions.

He allowed a free vote on a matter of conscience, those against it don't like the outcome.

Brian? · 09-10-2017 9:19am

blanch152 wrote: »

He allowed a free vote on a matter of conscience, those against it don't like the outcome.

Yes?

My point: even in his time he was regressive. He voted according to Catholic doctorine. I don’t find anything to admire about that.

blanch152 · 09-10-2017 9:22am

Brian? wrote: »

Yes?

My point: even in his time he was regressive. He voted according to Catholic doctorine. I don’t find anything to admire about that.

Conservative rather than regressive.

Not admiring it, I am just pointing out the fact that when you hear calls for a free vote these days, it is most usual from the liberal perspective. Ironic that Cosgrave gets criticised for a free vote from the same perspective. Seems like you can have a free vote so long as you vote the way we want you to.

kk.man · 09-10-2017 10:01am

On the contraception issue which was entirely he own choice. He voted according to his moral compass just as many religious minded politicians might. What's more unusual about he was the leader of the country. Pity more leaders don't have as much courage.

Btw I am not anti contraception or pro church when I make this argument. I think people who discribes it as regressive are not looking at it from a holistic view just a mere bashing exercise.

blanch152 · 09-10-2017 10:52am

kk.man wrote: »

On the contraception issue which was entirely he own choice. He voted according to his moral compass just as many religious minded politicians might. What's more unusual about he was the leader of the country. Pity more leaders don't have as much courage.

Btw I am not anti contraception or pro church when I make this argument. I think people who discribes it as regressive are not looking at it from a holistic view just a mere bashing exercise.

The danger with free votes on conscience issues is that they do not always reflect the wider societal views. The good thing is that politicians are actually being asked to stand up for their own actual beliefs and lead from the front.

It leaves me with mixed views about them particularly as the ones most strident for free votes generally believe their cause will benefit most from one rather than that they are a good idea per se.

Brian? · 09-10-2017 10:54am

kk.man wrote: »

On the contraception issue which was entirely he own choice. He voted according to his moral compass just as many religious minded politicians might. What's more unusual about he was the leader of the country. Pity more leaders don't have as much courage.

Btw I am not anti contraception or pro church when I make this argument. I think people who discribes it as regressive are not looking at it from a holistic view just a mere bashing exercise.

I’m not describing it as regressive. It was regressive. How can you describe it any other way?

As for this moral compass argument, I don’t buy it. His moral compass was set by the Catholic Church, not by what was best for the people of Ireland. Why would you admire someone for sticking by their religious belief system when it brought harm to the people he was supposed to serve? I’m glad more politicians didn’t have this type of “courage”. It did nothing but hold us back.

Voting to keep contraception illegal in the 1970s. The 1970s!

Brian? · 09-10-2017 10:58am

blanch152 wrote: »

Conservative rather than regressive.

Two sides of the same coin.

Not admiring it, I am just pointing out the fact that when you hear calls for a free vote these days, it is most usual from the liberal perspective. Ironic that Cosgrave gets criticised for a free vote from the same perspective. Seems like you can have a free vote so long as you vote the way we want you to.

I don’t care about free votes. I care about doing what’s right. Politicians should vote in the best interests of the people who elected them, not on the orders of a the Religious establishment.

Say what you want about Edna, he actually upheld this principle very well. One of the few things I admired about him. He put aside his own religious beliefs when he came to social issues.

blanch152 · 09-10-2017 10:59am

Brian? wrote: »

I’m not describing it as regressive. It was regressive. How can you describe it any other way?

As for this moral compass argument, I don’t buy it. His moral compass was set by the Catholic Church, not by what was best for the people of Ireland. Why would you admire someone for sticking by their religious belief system when it brought harm to the people he was supposed to serve? I’m glad more politicians didn’t have this type of “courage”. It did nothing but hold us back.

Voting to keep contraception illegal in the 1970s. The 1970s!

Regressive is a pejorative term and implies it was a step backward and that contraception is an obvious good thing. However, that ignores the views of a number of religions that still hold sway over large numbers of people across the world.

I disagree with the decision to allow a free vote, I would have voted the other way to him, but I respect his decision to vote in accordance with his conscience, but while I would describe his position as conservative, I would not describe it as regressive.

Brian? · 09-10-2017 11:16am

blanch152 wrote: »

Regressive is a pejorative term and implies it was a step backward and that contraception is an obvious good thing. However, that ignores the views of a number of religions that still hold sway over large numbers of people across the world.

I disagree with the decision to allow a free vote, I would have voted the other way to him, but I respect his decision to vote in accordance with his conscience, but while I would describe his position as conservative, I would not describe it as regressive.

We can argue the wording all day, I don’t think either of us will budge on it. But I can’t respect someone for voting based on their conscience when it did harm to he people he was supposed to represent. I find nothing to admire or respect in it.

FrancieBrady · 09-10-2017 11:20am

If you go against what your party want to do to modernise, that is 'regressive' all day long regardless of conscience.

kk.man · 09-10-2017 11:36am

Brian? wrote: »

Two sides of the same coin.

I don’t care about free votes. I care about doing what’s right. Politicians should vote in the best interests of the people who elected them, not on the orders of a the Religious establishment.

Say what you want about Edna, he actually upheld this principle very well. One of the few things I admired about him. He put aside his own religious beliefs when he came to social issues.

Enda had to, Lucinda was chomping at the bit!

kk.man · 09-10-2017 11:45am

Brian? wrote: »

Two sides of the same coin.

I don’t care about free votes. I care about doing what’s right. Politicians should vote in the best interests of the people who elected them, not on the orders of a the Religious establishment.

Say what you want about Edna, he actually upheld this principle very well. One of the few things I admired about him. He put aside his own religious beliefs when he came to social issues.

Where's the evidence he acted on the orders of a reglious establishment?

Liam Cosgrave used the word 'conscience' there is a difference.

Brian? · 09-10-2017 3:05pm

kk.man wrote: »

Where's the evidence he acted on the orders of a reglious establishment?

Liam Cosgrave used the word 'conscience' there is a difference.

It was his conscience though, was it? It was religious indoctrination.

To be fair to him, he wasn’t alone in that failing. He had a lot of company in fact. I just don’t see it as something to admire, the way some people do.

09-10-2017 4:22pm

Manach wrote: »

Criticism based on him not meeting the exalted standards on todays enlightened times, part and parcel of such times.

This has already been answered, but it deserves emphasis.

It is inaccurate to imply that Cosgrave's outlook is merely incompatible with today's standards. He was remarkably pious -- indeed, fundamentalist -- by the standards of that time.

Public opinion had galloped far ahead of Cosgrave by the time he finally retired. His political outlook seemed to have stopped maturing the 1950's, and by the time he retired in 1981, his outlook was totally out of sync with public opinion.

blanch152 · 09-10-2017 5:17pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If you go against what your party want to do to modernise, that is 'regressive' all day long regardless of conscience.

What does modernise mean?

I am guilty of using the same language from time to time but in reality when you use the word "modernise", you are attempting to put down the opposite side by portraying them as backwards looking.

Cosgrave would probably say that he was looking for a return to traditional values. Again, that might be a phrase used by an Irish language lobbyist or a traditional republican in another context at a different time and be welcomed by some of the people now criticising Cosgrave.

Language has a power all by itself. Context is everything.

FrancieBrady · 09-10-2017 5:24pm

blanch152 wrote: »

What does modernise mean?

I am guilty of using the same language from time to time but in reality when you use the word "modernise", you are attempting to put down the opposite side by portraying them as backwards looking.

Cosgrave would probably say that he was looking for a return to traditional values. Again, that might be a phrase used by an Irish language lobbyist or a traditional republican in another context at a different time and be welcomed by some of the people now criticising Cosgrave.

Language has a power all by itself. Context is everything.

The context was a political party trying to make peoples lives better and free them from enslavement to outdated moral dogma of one church essentially, by giving them choice.

Liam decided he knew better like many Roman Catholic males.

kk.man · 11-10-2017 11:52pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The context was a political party trying to make peoples lives better and free them from enslavement to outdated moral dogma of one church essentially, by giving them choice.

Liam decided he knew better like many Roman Catholic males.

It's very easy be populist and stand on a soap box these days. I lived in 70s Ireland it was not a revolutionary decade. Mass attendance was at an all time high, seminaries were full and conservative politics were in vogue. So to say regressive and not modernising people's well being is far wide of the mark by voting against contraception.

FrancieBrady · 12-10-2017 6:52am

kk.man wrote: »

It's very easy be populist and stand on a soap box these days. I lived in 70s Ireland it was not a revolutionary decade. Mass attendance was at an all time high, seminaries were full and conservative politics were in vogue. So to say regressive and not modernising people's well being is far wide of the mark by voting against contraception.

His party were attempting to modernise society - which is hardly a revolutionary thing to do - Liam went against his party policy and stood for the traditional Roman Catholic stance. That is regressive all day long.

James Brown · 12-10-2017 3:00pm

kk.man wrote: »

It's very easy be populist and stand on a soap box these days. I lived in 70s Ireland it was not a revolutionary decade. Mass attendance was at an all time high, seminaries were full and conservative politics were in vogue. So to say regressive and not modernising people's well being is far wide of the mark by voting against contraception.

By your post, he was populist and not looking to change things.

Brian? · 13-10-2017 6:44pm

kk.man wrote: »

It's very easy be populist and stand on a soap box these days. I lived in 70s Ireland it was not a revolutionary decade. Mass attendance was at an all time high, seminaries were full and conservative politics were in vogue. So to say regressive and not modernising people's well being is far wide of the mark by voting against contraception.

You realize that voting against legalising contraception was being populist? If you don’t you really need to look up what populist means.

blanch152 · 13-10-2017 6:49pm

Brian? wrote: »

You realize that voting against legalising contraception was being populist? If you don’t you really need to look up what populist means.

In what way was voting against legalising contraception being populist?

FG lost the following general election, in part because of their Taoiseach sticking with his conscience, hardly a populist outcome, was it?

kk.man · 13-10-2017 8:07pm

For some reason you have misinterpreted my use of populist. When I referred to populist I mean the liberal agenda of today not in anyway Cosgrave stance on various subjects of the 1970s.

I have just read Micheal Martin's position on the 8th amendment and funny enough he uses the word 'conscience' as a method party members may adopt when voting. Is he regressive or maybe on the orders of a reglious establishment?

FrancieBrady · 13-10-2017 8:14pm

kk.man wrote: »

For some reason you have misinterpreted my use of populist. When I referred to populist I mean the liberal agenda of today not in anyway Cosgrave stance on various subjects of the 1970s.

I have just read Micheal Martin's position on the 8th amendment and funny enough he uses the word 'conscience' as a method party members may adopt when voting. Is he regressive or maybe on the orders of a reglious establishment?

He is allowing party members to let their conscience influence party policy. A limp way to do politics and regressive.
If you believe in choice then legislate for it. Lead. Exercise your conscience when YOU have to choose.

kk.man · 13-10-2017 8:48pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He is allowing party members to let their conscience influence party policy. A limp way to do politics and regressive.
If you believe in choice then legislate for it. Lead. Exercise your conscience when YOU have to choose.

Micheál knows that there is a certain conservative element among FF membership and in order to not rock the boat this is the best policitial stragetry. After all this is politics ! Call it opt out or cop out but it's regressive in the eyes of the liberal agenda. I think it's an unfair assessment. Will Martin's policitial legacy be defined by this decision? I think not nor should it no more than the late Mr. Cosgrave.

FrancieBrady · 13-10-2017 9:23pm

kk.man wrote: »

Micheál knows that there is a certain conservative element among FF membership and in order to not rock the boat this is the best policitial stragetry. After all this is politics ! Call it opt out or cop out but it's regressive in the eyes of the liberal agenda. I think it's an unfair assessment. Will Martin's policitial legacy be defined by this decision? I think not nor should it no more than the late Mr. Cosgrave.

If he is pandering to people who don't want to move forward ie 'conserve', then he is being regressive, ie, he wants to go back or tread water.

Cosgrove was a conservative who sought to hold back the rights of men and women.

kk.man · 13-10-2017 9:37pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If he is pandering to people who don't want to move forward ie 'conserve', then he is being regressive, ie, he wants to go back or tread water.

Cosgrove was a conservative who sought to hold back the rights of men and women.

If Martin had a clear majority he wouldn't give two hoots on this issue.
Cosgrave maybe defined as conservative but like Martin did not impose his stance thus allowing a free vote. I fail to see where either have held back rights of people nor were/is any sanctions for those who differ.

FrancieBrady · 13-10-2017 9:59pm

kk.man wrote: »

If Martin had a clear majority he wouldn't give two hoots on this issue.
Cosgrave maybe defined as conservative but like Martin did not impose his stance thus allowing a free vote. I fail to see where either have held back rights of people nor were/is any sanctions for those who differ.

He had no problems with 'rights' when he stood over the Heavy Gang and that underpins the man. He 'imposed'
No nobody paid any attention to him on the contraception issue, but was that his intention? Looking at his career, I doubt it. He tried to regress. He failed

blanch152 · 13-10-2017 10:16pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If he is pandering to people who don't want to move forward ie 'conserve', then he is being regressive, ie, he wants to go back or tread water.

Cosgrove was a conservative who sought to hold back the rights of men and women.

Once again we are seeing the misuse of language.

Regressive is someone who wants to reverse change (note I am calling it change, not modernisation).

Conservative is someone who wants to retain the status quo or only make small changes.

Labelling also depends on a point of view. You could argue that someone who believes Ireland should be united for the first time since Brian Boru is the ultimate regressive or that someone who believes the island should live in peace and harmony under the one flag is the ultimate progressive. Another person might call either of them naive.

All of those are labels from different perspectives.

kk.man · 13-10-2017 10:17pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

He had no problems with 'rights' when he stood over the Heavy Gang and that underpins the man. He 'imposed'
No nobody paid any attention to him on the contraception issue, but was that his intention? Looking at his career, I doubt it. He tried to regress. He failed

There is no factual proof of a 'heavy gang' and certainly no imposition of rights. Regression is imprinted all over Fiinna Fail long history in power under Dev.
You are on a liberal soap box which you are quite entited, however they are others who make up this country which can express their views and opinions. I prefer looking at this debate from a holistic view point.

FrancieBrady · 13-10-2017 10:32pm

kk.man wrote: »

There is no factual proof of a 'heavy gang' and certainly no imposition of rights. Regression is imprinted all over Fiinna Fail long history in power under Dev.
You are on a liberal soap box which you are quite entited, however they are others who make up this country which can express their views and opinions. I prefer looking at this debate from a holistic view point.

OK, no factual proof of a 'heavy gang'? I'm out. When you get down to arguing about a word your client is in bother.
Carry on with the canonisation.

kk.man · 13-10-2017 10:45pm

FrancieBrady wrote: »

OK, no factual proof of a 'heavy gang'? I'm out. When you get down to arguing about a word your client is in bother.
Carry on with the canonisation.

On your last point he would not have been a policitial hero of mine, I simply admired him as he was a man for his time.
I prefer to look objectively on these political/social issues.

Brian? · 14-10-2017 9:31am

blanch152 wrote: »

In what way was voting against legalising contraception being populist?

Because 90% of the country were made going Catholics. He did what was popular to his supporters over what was best for the people of Ireland.

FG lost the following general election, in part because of their Taoiseach sticking with his conscience, hardly a populist outcome, was it?

I think you’ll find they lost that election because of how the economic crisis was mishandled.

Brian? · 14-10-2017 9:34am

kk.man wrote: »

For some reason you have misinterpreted my use of populist. When I referred to populist I mean the liberal agenda of today not in anyway Cosgrave stance on various subjects of the 1970s.

You’re using “populist” wrong, I’m not misinterpretating your use.

I have just read Micheal Martin's position on the 8th amendment and funny enough he uses the word 'conscience' as a method party members may adopt when voting. Is he regressive or maybe on the orders of a reglious establishment?

Yes. He is being regressive. What’s your point?

FrancieBrady · 14-10-2017 9:37am

kk.man wrote: »

On your last point he would not have been a policitial hero of mine, I simply admired him as he was a man for his time.
I prefer to look objectively on these political/social issues.

You are not looking objectively, you are looking at him through an excusing filter (in bold above)

Is Harvey Weinstein excused because 'he is a man for his time'? You can excuse anyone with that subjective phrase

Liam Cosgrave RIP

Comments