nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The majority of Irish people are passive and obedient.

harryr711

Noam Chomsky: The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.

For most Irish people the spectrum of acceptable opinion is FF and FG. I know many people who have this opinion, and given the almost daily scandals in the media they haven't got a clue what way to vote at the next General Election, but it'll only be one of four options - FF, FG, spoiled vote, no vote.

FF and FG have for a long time been almost one and the same, with only the civil war acting as the dividing line.

If this is the spectrum of acceptable opinion for the majority, then is it unrealistic to expect change and reform in Ireland? Will history just repeat itself ad nauseum?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

marketty

harryr711 wrote: »

Noam Chomsky: The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.

For most Irish people the spectrum of acceptable opinion is FF and FG. I know many people who have this opinion, and given the almost daily scandals in the media they haven't got a clue what way to vote at the next General Election, but it'll only be one of four options - FF, FG, spoiled vote, no vote.

FF and FG have for a long time been almost one and the same, with only the civil war acting as the dividing line.

If this is the spectrum of acceptable opinion for the majority, then is it unrealistic to expect change and reform in Ireland? Will history just repeat itself ad nauseum?

If you say so

JuliusCaesar

harryr711 wrote: »

FF and FG have for a long time been almost one and the same

Blaphemy!

According to FG/FF supporters

Phoebas

I don't understand what this thread is about. What do you mean by 'acceptable opinion' OP?

FairytaleGirl

Lol have you been to the North!I wish more here were passive and obedient!

adrag

harryr711 wrote: »

Noam Chomsky: The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.

For most Irish people the spectrum of acceptable opinion is FF and FG. I know many people who have this opinion, and given the almost daily scandals in the media they haven't got a clue what way to vote at the next General Election, but it'll only be one of four options - FF, FG, spoiled vote, no vote.

FF and FG have for a long time been almost one and the same, with only the civil war acting as the dividing line.

If this is the spectrum of acceptable opinion for the majority, then is it unrealistic to expect change and reform in Ireland? Will history just repeat itself ad nauseum?

Those who fail to examine their past, are doomed to repeat it,
Change cant happen unless tht 2big parties change .chances of that zero

Annasopra

harryr711 wrote: »

Noam Chomsky: The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.

For most Irish people the spectrum of acceptable opinion is FF and FG. I know many people who have this opinion, and given the almost daily scandals in the media they haven't got a clue what way to vote at the next General Election, but it'll only be one of four options - FF, FG, spoiled vote, no vote.

FF and FG have for a long time been almost one and the same, with only the civil war acting as the dividing line.

If this is the spectrum of acceptable opinion for the majority, then is it unrealistic to expect change and reform in Ireland? Will history just repeat itself ad nauseum?

I'm not sure that I would agree with your thesis at all about FF/FG/Spoiled vote/No vote. There are various other options.

kneemos

We might have Lucinda Creighton and her far right party to talk about shortly.
The left doesn't work and generally fall in line with their coalition buddies anyway.
I'd agree though FF and FG are entrenched in their ways.

Valetta

I'm not really sure what this is about either.

I have my own opinions and don't really care who they are "accepted" by.

Maybe I'm wierd.

harryr711

Phoebas wrote: »

I don't understand what this thread is about. What do you mean by 'acceptable opinion' OP?

"Acceptable opinion" is spectrum/range of opinion that is deemed acceptable and reasonable by the majority of society, e.g. FF and FG being the only acceptable political parties for the majority of Irish people. Everything that falls outside that spectrum is deemed as unacceptable/radical/insane and so on. The limits as to what is acceptable and the inability to consider and analyse other opinions, also acts to reinforce what is deemed acceptable.

mango salsa wrote: »

I'm not sure that I would agree with your thesis at all about FF/FG/Spoiled vote/No vote. There are various other options.

There are other options, but for a lot of people those other options are not acceptable.

kneemos

The Greens were original thinkers.Sadly that thinking was
ballbag crazy.

Howard Juneau

As long as the alternatives to FF & FG are the likes of Ming & Mick and the economically clueless SF there won't be much of a shift in voting patterns.
Just FG & FF playing "To me, to you' with the seat of power

MonstaMash

Soon as I read FF/FG, I switched off...I'm out!

Annasopra

harryr711 wrote: »

There are other options, but for a lot of people those other options are not acceptable.

But for a lot of people they are acceptable! !!!!!

Phoebas

harryr711 wrote: »

"Acceptable opinion" is spectrum/range of opinion that is deemed acceptable and reasonable by the majority of society, e.g. FF and FG being the only acceptable political parties for the majority of Irish people. Everything that falls outside that spectrum is deemed as unacceptable/radical/insane and so on. The limits as to what is acceptable and the inability to consider and analyse other opinions, also acts to reinforce what is deemed acceptable.

you've only told me that 'acceptable opinion' is opinion that is deemed 'acceptable'.
Don't you really mean that different people just have different opinions?
By describing people that don't share your opinion as 'passive' and 'obedient', aren't you really doing exactly what you're complaining of - deeming these opinions as somehow unacceptable?

Howard Juneau

mango salsa wrote: »

But for a lot of people they are acceptable! !!!!!

It's called a protest vote.
The Green party rode that wave some years ago. Now it's the alliance of looneys, by the time the next election comes around we may have another beneficiary of the fickle Irish voters ways

Santa Cruz

Howard Juneau wrote: »

It's called a protest vote.
The Green party rode that wave some years ago. Now it's the alliance of looneys, by the time the next election comes around we may have another beneficiary of the fickle Irish voters ways

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

gugleguy

Did you post this thread because of the subject makes useful content for theimpending RAG WEEK season in irish 3rd level colleges OP?

Karl Stein

The mainstream media is a case in point in the business of keeping the debate within acceptable parameters. Critical intellectuals don't get airtime on regular media outlets - their speaking truth to power is not welcome on what amount to propaganda outlets for the establishment.

What happens then is that these critical intellectuals end up getting air-time on media outlets like RT or Al Jazeera which allows the usual goons to say 'pfff RT?' sure that's just an extension of the Kremlin which may be true but ignores what's being discussed. The legitimate criticisms of the status quo and the speaking of truth to power gets stigmatised and drowned out. Job done.

Howard Juneau

Santa Cruz wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dY0veESwXtU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

harryr711

Phoebas wrote: »

you've only told me that 'acceptable opinion' is opinion that is deemed 'acceptable'.
Don't you really mean that different people just have different opinions?
By describing people that don't share your opinion as 'passive' and 'obedient', aren't you really doing exactly what you're complaining of - deeming these opinions as somehow unacceptable?

No, you should read Chomsky's quote and try to understand it. I haven't stated what my political opinion is, I'm purely commenting on the spectrum of acceptable opinion, how narrow that spectrum is in Ireland for the majority, and how opinions outside that spectrum are dismissed out of hand.

BillyMitchel

Nothing to see here folks, carry on.

Phoebas

harryr711 wrote: »

No, you should read Chomsky's quote and try to understand it. I haven't stated what my political opinion is, I'm purely commenting on the spectrum of acceptable opinion, how narrow that spectrum is in Ireland for the majority, and how opinions outside that spectrum are dismissed out of hand.

The title you put on your thread labels the majority of Irish people as passive and obedient - that's not Chomsky, that's you!

dxhound2005

Charles Rocher wrote: »

The mainstream media is a case in point in the business of keeping the debate within acceptable parameters. Critical intellectuals don't get airtime on regular media outlets - their speaking truth to power is not welcome on what amount to propaganda outlets for the establishment.

What happens then is that these critical intellectuals end up getting air-time on media outlets like RT or Al Jazeera which allows the usual goons to say 'pfff RT?' sure that's just an extension of the Kremlin which may be true but ignores what's being discussed. The legitimate criticisms of the status quo and the speaking of truth to power gets stigmatised and drowned out. Job done.

Give me a few names of these intellectuals who don't get airtime on regular media outlets. Is it that they never sought airtime or that were they refused when they did? And which media outlets?

Just half a dozen names will do to start with, including the ones from RT and Al Jazeera if you like. I will see what is known about them and judge for myself how intellectual they are.

P_1

mango salsa wrote: »

I'm not sure that I would agree with your thesis at all about FF/FG/Spoiled vote/No vote. There are various other options.

True there are various other options but I think the point was that no matter what way you vote you're going to ultimately end up with one of the two (FF/FG) being the leading party in the government.

Phoebas

P_1 wrote: »

True there are various other options but I think the point was that no matter what way you vote you're going to ultimately end up with one of the two (FF/FG) being the leading party in the government.

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever. If enough people vote for the other parties, then they'll be the leading party in government.

harryr711

Phoebas wrote: »

The title you put on your thread labels the majority of Irish people as passive and obedient - that's not Chomsky, that's you!

And as I said, that's not my political opinion, that is my take on how Chomsky's quote on the spectrum of opinion applies to Ireland, "how narrow that spectrum is in Ireland for the majority, and how opinions outside that spectrum are dismissed out of hand." Seriously, read Chomsky's quote and try to understand what he is saying.

SpaceTime

The analysis actually applies better to countries like the USA, France and the UK that have 2 party systems.

Take a look at Irish election results over the past 30 years.
The electorate is quite rapidly becoming a lot less predictable and FF and FG's share of the vote has been steadily shrinking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_general_election,_2011

It's a very long time since we've had a single party government.

Frank Black

Perhaps the OP could give a few examples of Countries being governed by far left or right wing parties and then we could see if that would be a better way to go.

professore

If there was a credible alternative I'd vote for it. But there isn't, so probably will vote FG in the next election. If Shane Ross and David Mc Williams, that stockbroker guy on Vincent Browne, Ming Flanagan and Michael O'Leary formed a party I would vote for them. Otherwise no.

anncoates

It's always an amusing characteristic of a lot of smug left utterances about the passivity of others that you think merely pointing out the passivity of others in itself is equivalent to 'action' and deserving of moral superiority.