That SF Presidential campaign… October 26, 2011
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics, The Left.55 comments
I was interested in some of the critiques of McGuinness in comments this week and they raise serious questions. But before I get to them I have to note in passing the bald-headed partitionism of one questioner on FrontLine on Monday, a questioner who appeared blissfully unaware of the fact that this state has had a President from Northern Ireland for fourteen odd years now. The argument appeared rooted in some sort of essentialism about identity, we – down South – are us, they – up North – are other, which curiously, at least to my eyes seems like an odd inversion of certain strands of traditional Republicanism in its thinking as regards the identities extant on this island which rather than being complex and overlapping are fixed and immutable. Have we learned nothing? Well, apparently some have not.
It’s funny, the release of the Norris tape last week, like yet another seemingly quixotic attack by Gay Mitchell on Martin McGuinness at the weekend, felt like there was a parallel election process being run slightly to one side of the real one. Who in the world thought last week, or still thinks, David Norris is anywhere in contention for the Presidency – even if he uses ‘dark horse’ rhetoric? And likewise, although I think his showing will be reasonably good we know that McGuinness won’t come in above number 3 spot. But… there were solid tactical reasons to attack him.
So perhaps it is that the Norris tape was sat on until late in the campaign precisely in order to generate an effect were Norris a contender of substance, and now it’s been released either simply because that was the plan come what may or perhaps due to a more pernicious effort simply to get the boot in one last time now that he’s down.
Way back when over the Summer this tape might have scuppered his chances entirely, though not necessarily, but now? Given that there’s been relentless attacks on all candidates, again bar Higgins who is clearly a man of saintly mien, his rhetorical indiscretions seem somehow lesser, and perhaps that’s why his poll rating sees him as most likely 4th.
As was noted though previously, there’s method in Gay Mitchell’s madness last week in trying to whip up [further] resentment against Martin McGuinness. And understandable for a candidate who looks set to be the least effective FG Presidential nominee ever, and worse again likely to limp home well behind the hated Shinners. Small wonder that the McCabe family entered the fray. And while that too is understandable on a human level it merely points up a grim partitionism at work on this island where whatever the rhetoric to the contrary there is more weight accorded to the lives of some policemen than others. For those of us who considered the murder of McCabe to be murder, just like the murder of RUC and UDR men and women was murder this hierarchy is irrelevant, not least given the enormous sacrifices of human spirit that have been asked of unionists in the course of bringing the conflict to an end. But then, as has been made abundantly clear during the campaign, Unionists and Republicans seem to be often little more than a backdrop against which elements of the media, parties or candidates in this state can variously exercise their ire.
I was talking to a friend who is in SF the other day and it was interesting to hear their take on it. Although pragmatic and realistic about SF’s chances in the Presidential election they were remarkably upbeat. For them although it was clear McGuinness wouldn’t win they were pleased that he had done so well, and moreover they had the attitude that his candidacy would ‘lance a boil’. They didn’t go into detail, but I understood what they meant.
It’s not as if this has necessarily been good for SF in the short term. As was noted in a discussion on Pat Kenny on the radio this morning…
Campaign for SF was as much about trying to address the issue which has kept a ceiling on the SF vote – given the economic circumstances – which was the legacy of the conflict of the North and to get beyond it… but it hasn’t worked.
And how could it, really, given the candidate and the nature of the discourse in the south which surrounds him? But perhaps it will lance a boil, albeit not immediately.
Here’s the thing. There has not been and never will be again an SF candidate as contentious as McGuinness. And yet he has managed at one time to get near enough 20 per cent support from the electorate. He won’t get that tomorrow though, or at least so it seems. But he may well match the SF party vote as polled this week and weekend, somewhere between 13 and 16 percent and if it’s the latter then that’s a result. All this with McGuinness. What one wonders would another less conflicting candidate have done? Problem is what other candidate? Some are too young, literally in constitutional terms, others are too close to his generation. Perhaps a less conflicting candidate, an O’Caolain or even a Morgan or a de Brún might have done better. We’ll never know.
The Independent had this take on it this morning:
While Michael D Higgins will be the ultimate beneficiary of that timely piece of bushwhacking, there should be fringe benefits for McGuinness. It seems likely that some preferences will swap from Gallagher to him. One or two extra percentage points in the polls will make a difference to Sinn Fein, which is in this race for long-term gains.
Any vote above 10pc of the poll — the figure achieved in the general election earlier this year — is a result.
But this has many ramifications. Firstly it is clear that SF hasn’t thrown him or his generation under the bus. This isn’t a small thing. For me coming from the WP originally what has been striking is how well managed all this has been. SF has broadly speaking held onto its core while expanding its base. And it’s done this by not ignoring that core or its history even if the direction has… erm… changed. Unfortunately the WP in the 1980s tended to do the opposite, and ignored its own history whether recent or not so recent. Indeed it’s only since the split in the 1990s and the departure of many who knew all too well about what was going on that it began to come to terms with its own past.
There’s no way to overestimate how important that is in terms of consolidating a movement. Lose the heritage and supporters and members become detached. Retain it and even if the line changes at least there are points of commonality sufficient to smooth over many a dispute [indeed the Hanley Miller book on the WP is clear on how well through the 70s the OSF managed this retaining members in numbers in areas in the North which one would have thought on paper would have gone to PIRA and PSF or INLA and IRSP but stayed on board because of a loyalty to the organisation - that many of those ultimately detached during the hunger strikes speaks of the power of those events rather than undermining that argument].
So, from here on out it is essentially easier for SF. It will present younger candidates, those who have little or no connection with armed struggle. This is all grand, but from a left perspective it leaves open the question as to just how left wing the party is. It is all too easy to see it slipping into a sort of faux-FF position of the centre [and there’s the obvious issue as to how well SF can retain coherence in the absence of that earlier generation, though FF offers a reasonably good indication that it can continue for quite some time].
There’s another point and it’s not often touched upon. This is a Fine Gael/Labour Party government, two parties whose hostility, in the main, to Republicans has been visceral and even intrinsic to aspects of their self-identity. There are those of us who have been very interested to see what if any impact their election would have on the peace process, and indeed the increased profile and representation of SF. To be honest so far, relatively speaking, so good. Exchanges in the Dáil have been less rancourous than might have been expected given the arrival of Adams there, though as we see on a weekly basis from the Seanad there’s still a level of hostility [by the way, the oddity of FG or the LP taking this on their shoulders is little commented upon. Of all parties on this island they surely are amongst those who have suffered least directly during the conflict and for those of us from points various beyond them there’s always been something a little cosmetic about it, particularly, say for those who have known personally those whose families or friends were injured grievously by PIRA, or indeed OIRA or the UVF or suffered discrimination under the Stormont regimes and harassment and worse under the British].
And in a way I wonder if this lancing of the boil operates in a way as yet unconsidered by Fine Gael, that by training such fire upon a man who soon enough short of a startling turn around in the polls will be – and one suspects thankfully – making his way back to the more congenial environment of the Assembly and the Executive, in some ways they’re exhausting that fire. And after that who will FG have to exercise its ire, or will it even have the appetite or enthusiasm to do so – particularly if McGuinness comes in ahead of Mitchell. Quite some turnaround there for an FG candidate to do less well than the SF one. But an indication of a potential future that opens up once McGuinness et al have left the stage. And that day is moving along fairly sharpish. McGuinness can be a lightening rod, but Dessie Ellis? Does he function in quite the same way, and then drop back a generation and those in it. Does Peadar Tóibín inspire the same animosity? How could he? At some point the power of SF to excite negative responses is going to diminish and I suspect sharply. It’s not difficult to remember how in 1992 Democratic Left wasn’t seen as a suitable partner for Fine Gael in government. Almost three years later and it was quite a different story. Which isn’t to suggest FG and SF cosying up together, highly unlikely one would think, but instead that nothing is static.
As noted above this functions for SF as well, in that the diminishing proximity of the armed struggle will inevitably change SF and the perception of SF and not necessarily to their advantage. But that’s for the further future. For the moment if they can consolidate at 15, 16 or 17 per cent, as the polls would seem to imply they’ll be happy enough.
And all this before this government has to impose socio-economic policy with its own stamp?
What you want to say? Open Thread, 26th October 2011 October 26, 2011
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics, The Left.42 comments
As ever… following on Dr. X’s suggestion, it’s all yours, “announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose”, feel free.
KKE Video on the 2 Day General Strike October 26, 2011
Posted by Garibaldy in Communism, Greece, KKE.8 comments
This video (which comes with subtitles) shows the scale of the recent general strikes against the Troika in Greece, and also discusses the issues raised by the attacks on the PAME march.
Bits and pieces – The Inquiries Referendum, Peace Processes home and away, Blogging and the view of Iraq held by some on the US right October 25, 2011
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Economy, Irish Politics, The Left, US Politics.21 comments
I have to admit I like the Kangaroo Court Inquiries referendum posters. They’re neat and effective and the reference to Kangaroo Courts is clever. Who though is responsible for putting them up around town? The ICCL. Meanwhile bad news for Alan Shatter with the communication from eight, count ‘em – eight, former attorneys general against the referendum. They’re all pretty orthodox, which probably adds to his ire..
Mr [Peter] Sutherland was attorney general to the FitzGerald-led Fine Gael/ Labour coalition in 1981; Mr [Patrick] Connolly to the Haughey-led Fianna Fáil government in 1982; Mr [John] Rogers to the Fine Gael/Labour coalition from 1984-1987; Mr [Harry] Whelehan to the short-lived Fianna Fáil/Labour coalition in 1992; Mr [Dermot] Gleeson to the Bruton-led coalition from 1994-1997; Mr [David] Byrne to the Fianna Fáil/PD coalition in 1997; Mr [Michael] McDowell to a similar coalition from 1999 to 2002, and Mr [Paul] Gallagher to the last government, the Fianna Fáil/PD/Green coalition.
And God knows if some of them are agin it I’d be tempted to go for it. But what’s interesting about the whole affair is the head of steam building up in opposition to the Government. I’d bet they didn’t think this would be situation when they first mooted the referendum but it’s an useful reminder, if reminder is needed, of how unpredictable political processes actually are. I’d think, from the most recent polling data that it will be passed, but…
There’s something just a little ironic about the news that:
A public appeal from Annan and fellow mediators, including the Sinn Féin president, Gerry Adams, for Eta to embrace peace will provide the group with an excuse for declaring its readiness to abandon arms, according to sources. Radical Basque separatist political leaders would then imitate moves by Adams during the Ulster peace process when, in 2005, he appealed directly for the IRA to lay down its weapons.
… at least it seems ironic contextualised with the events closer to home.
Meanwhile, I couldn’t ignore Seán Farren of the SDLP, who contributed a piece to the Irish Times last week. He made some interesting assertions, including the following:
Unlike in 1919-1920, there was a viable, widely supported constitutional and peaceful alternative in the North in the form of the civil rights movement and the SDLP under the leadership of men like John Hume and Séamus Mallon, and by successive Irish governments.
The equivalence that some, among them Martin McGuinness, have drawn between violence and the constitutional approach is patently false. There was no equivalence, a fact the overwhelming majority of Irish people recognised in every test of popular opinion throughout the Troubles.
It was this constitutional alternative that ensured the achievement of the civil rights agenda, from “one person, one vote”, to fair housing, to equality of opportunity in the workplace. The political achievements of 1973, culminating in Sunningdale, were forerunners by 25 years of the Good Friday agreement.
And…
Those agreements contained all of the essentials of the 1998 agreement: powersharing, a Council of Ireland and human rights reforms. Yet those who negotiated these agreements, the SDLP and the Irish government in particular, were roundly denounced as traitors to the cause of Irish unity by the Provisional IRA and Sinn Féin. SDLP public representatives were subjected to violent attacks while being described by Martin McGuinness as “cringing and crawling” for negotiating with the British and unionists. More ominously, McGuinness vowed the Provos would continue their “war” until a British withdrawal had been declared.
I won’t for a moment disagree with his point about the attacks by some Republicans upon SDLP members, and there was no honour in that. But Farren glosses over three very important aspects of the situation. Firstly that it was not the IRA in either of its variants which brought down Sunningdale [which while similar to the structures established under the GFA/BA was not identical] but instead Unionism and Loyalism. Secondly that Unionism and Loyalism balked at every turn at the very prospect of sharing power with moderate nationalism as exemplified by the SDLP throughout the decades of the conflict, indeed were hugely antagonistic to the very idea of powersharing regarding it as undemocratic. Thirdly that the current round of attacks on McGuinness echo in no small way those directed against the leader of his own party, John Hume, during the early and mid-period of the Peace Process. I won’t pretend that there is an understandable bitterness on the part of some nationalists about the rise of Sinn Féin [and I suspect many in the SDLP instinctively knew that this was a possibility during the peace process] but what precisely did those who supported the process expect? Were they so naive as to think Republicanism would make shift away from armed struggle to simply leave the stage? None of which is to understate the pool of hurt that Republicanism added to across that history, but simply to point out that there were no easy options at any point and nothing happened in isolation.
Then there’s the slow wending of its way by the Smithwick Tribunal which is seeing a range of unlikely faces appear before it.
Consider Kevin Myers contribution to the Tribunal about his assertion that there were two IRA moles and an IRA cell in Dundalk Garda Station in the 1980s. Remember he made the claim in 2000.
He acknowledged he was incorrect on some details in relation to some of the murders. He told Mr O’Callaghan the column was based on his opinions and assertions. He said a column was “a different factual plane” than a news article or editorial comment. “All we can do is tell the truth as sincerely and as impartially as possible,” he said.
Mr O’Callaghan asked: “Do you think that article told the truth in a fair and impartial manner?” Mr Myers said: “No, I don’t believe it did.” He said he was inspired to write the piece because “there was too many cross-Border operations going wrong without something systemically wrong”.
Hmmm… he acknowledges now that the term ‘cell’ ‘suggests a coherence that might not have existed’. So that’s okay then.
A lot has changed since the CLR started up some five and more years ago. It’s different in some hardly quantifiable way to how it was. Actually some of that is quantifiable. There’s a lot of competition out there, most of it from non-blogging platforms. But that hasn’t impacted as much as might have once been thought.
And blogging goes through phases. A few weeks ago I tried to prune the blogroll in the right hand column and it was kind of depressing to see which sites had shut up shop – for the present at least. Take Hugh Green at the Punishment of Sloth. I’d kind of hoped he was going to be back soonish on his own site, but nope, not so far.
Yet simultaneously there are new blogs and the return of old ones. Splintered Sunrise has been posting on a reasonably regular basis since the New Year and it’s great to read a voice which has been very much missed across the past year or so.
So, gains and losses.
I can’t quite work out in my own head whether blogging will continue that far into the future or will become nestled within other social media as a long form process. I’d be interested in what people think or how they use those media and blogs.
Finally, for now, what of William Saletan’s piece in slate which neatly considers the attitude of US conservatism, or at least one part of it, to the issue of Iraqi sovereignty, not least in relation to the US troops stationed there and their exposure to prosecution by Iraqi authorities.
The response from Gingrich, Santorum and Bachmann – amongst others? Let’s just say they’re not fans and close with this quote from the latter…
We’ve put a lot of deposit into this situation with Iraq. And to think that we are so disrespected and they have so little fear of the United States that there would be nothing that we would gain from this … We are there as the nation that liberated these people. And that’s the thanks that the United States is getting after 4,400 lives were expended and over $800 billion? And so on the way out, we’re being kicked out of the country? I think this is absolutely outrageous.
He did what? Presidential Election Debate Update! October 25, 2011
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics.47 comments
The sky may – near literally – have fallen over large parts of the country yesterday, Dublin may be partially submerged by water but… the campaign continues nonetheless. One feels that if it had been necessary to ferry candidates in and out of studios by gondolier it would have happened. And what’s this? What’s this???
INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE Seán Gallagher has conceded he may have delivered a €5,000 donation from a “convicted criminal and fuel smuggler” to Fianna Fáil headquarters three years ago.
In the latest dramatic twist in the presidential election campaign, Mr Gallagher, speaking during last night’s Frontline television debate on RTÉ, at first denied any knowledge of a Sinn Féin claim he had personally collected a €5,000 cheque from a man who attended a fundraiser for former taoiseach Brian Cowen.
But later…
“What I have done, I may well have delivered the photograph. If he gave me an envelope I . . . if he gave me the cheque it was made out to Fianna Fáil headquarters and it was delivered and that was that. It was nothing to do with me.”
Hmmm… welcome to the new politics.
Anyhow, a ‘Sinn Féin’ claim… interesting choice of words there.
I’d thought it might get even dirtier in these last few days before Thursday, but I surely didn’t expect SF to be the delivery system of the latest attack against Gallagher, but… I guess given how grim the campaign has been hitherto why would anyone be surprised?
For a campaign that people, including myself, thought would be dull before it started…
As to the substantive issue. It looks awful, or as IELB said… he ‘was caught rapid’. This can’t play well for Gallagher, it’s a perfect storm for him really – so much for his ‘independent’ status, so much for being a break with the past, and can’t – I’m presuming – do much good for McGuinness. So that leaves the question as to how grateful Labour will be to SF if Higgins wins. 
I’m interested in peoples thoughts on it and likely outcomes.
Just adding in some video of the debate (IEL)
The latest national poll in the Sunday Business Post. October 25, 2011
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics.add a comment
It’s worth considering the Sunday Business Post poll results. Part of their near monthly analysis, the results this time are as follows [although inconveniently the SBP doesn’t give the FG result which has to be inferred from the others numbers]:
FG 31 [slightly down]; Labour 17 [+1], Sinn Féin 16 [+1], Fianna Fáil 14 [-1]; Independents including GP and SP 22 [up slightly].
These are fascinating figures. Firstly the consolidation and increase of the Independents and SF votes. In my lifetime there’s never been a period where the Irish political system was so fractured in respect to the support afforded to the smaller parties and others. Then again in my lifetime I’ve never seen Fianna Fáíl sub-20 per cent, let alone 30 per cent. The Independents are clearly benefiting strongly from the profile of Gallagher et al. But this is part of a consistent thread through recent politics where their vote both before and during the last election was solid.
Richard Leahy in the SBP notes that ‘the strength of independent support is becoming a consistent trend in the polls and allied to the strong SF support it suggests that there is at least the potential for an anti-bailout, anti-austerity constituency which may be quite significant’.
He then notes though that there is a cleavage amongst the Independent TDs with many not at all focused on national issues, and he suggests that ‘apart from TDs like Shane Ross and Stephen Donnelly, many of their number appear to have neither the capacity nor the interest to engage in national politics, a nd particularly the key questions of political economy’.
I’m not sure that that’s entirely fair. One may like or dislike the ULA approach to such matters but still admit that they have an economic and political vision, whether fully worked out or not, that clearly transcends the local. But then the ULA aren’t really ‘independent’ TDs. It is true that the soft left Independent TDs, you know who they are, haven’t provided a consistent or coherent policy approach, perhaps they will, perhaps they won’t. But he admits, and the polls suggest this as well, that ‘that doesn’t mean that support for an alternative to the establishment parties won’t continue to grow’.
Labour retain support, perhaps with the candidacy of Michael D. Higgins doing them little or no harm. And given that he races ahead of the LP in terms of support that’s not a bad sign for the future. Except except that there remains the Budget. And so too with Fine Gael, no doubt unable to quite work out why it is that they are unable to translate that support into support for Mitchell – though to ask the question is in some respects to answer it. But 31 per cent isn’t that comfortable a figure for a party that has ‘tough’ decisions ahead and not that far ahead of where it was in 2007.
Are we seeing then the development of a 1 and 3 half parties system? With Independents providing a sort of counterweight? It’s all amazing stuff when one considers how for decades Labour was becalmed at around the 10 per cent mark and how SF in 1997, hardly fifteen years ago, gained 2.5 per cent of the first preference vote. But with that in mind perhaps the truth is that the fracturing of the system has been in play across that length of time and longer with increasingly larger groups of voters simply unwilling to pledge continuing loyalty to one formation or another, at least as regards the larger [or formerly larger] parties.
Fianna Fáil must hope not. On 14 per cent they’re in deep trouble, particularly if that number is going south, and even if Gallagher wins the election his hands-off and detached approach may mean they cannot take full, or even much, credit for his victory.
So, all told there’s something very odd and very intriguing going on in Irish politics. Perhaps the most obvious explanation is that the fracturing of the 1980s and 1990s [and one can look at the PD and WP as helping assist this fracturing even if they ultimately didn’t benefit from it] didn’t merely detach people from primary political allegiances but also served to push them away from political parties. How else to explain the ‘none of the above’ that the 22 Independents vote [and perhaps to some degree the SF vote too] represents? In the abstract this would be great from both a psephological and entertainment viewpoint – seeing FF fall and the possibility that FG will follow suit sooner rather than later is of undeniable interest.
It’d all be great except we’re, most of us anyhow, stuck inside the Republic and having to put up with the measures they implement before they eventually depart.
3 Presidential Polls… October 24, 2011
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Irish Politics.26 comments
And so, not one, not two, but three polls over the last few days. Lucky us. And some reading they make. The Sunday Business Post, the Sunday Times and the Irish Times this morning each offering us a read on the temperature of the electorate, the Business Post one being perhaps most useful because it also had a general party opinion poll as well so we can do some cross-correlation, but that’s another post.
The figures are revealing. Here are the different results of each poll.
Sunday Times: Gallagher – 38; Higgins – 26; McGuinness – 17; Mitchell – 8; Norris – 6; Davis – 3; Scallon – 2
Sunday Business Post/RedC: Gallagher – 40 [+1]; Higgins – 26 [-1]; McGuinness – 13; Norris – 10 [+3]; Mitchell – 6 [-2]; Scallon – 3 [+1]; Davis – 2 [-2]
Irish Times: Gallagher – 40 [+20]; Higgins – 25 [+2]; McGuinness – 15 [-4]; Norris – 8 [-3]; Mitchell – 6 [-3]; Scallon – 3 [-9]; Davis – 3 [-3]
First up there’s a level of similarity – I won’t call it agreement, but convergence might be a better term, between these polls. This might suggest that the figures are pretty solid for both Gallagher and Higgins, slightly less so for McGuinness – something I’ll return to in a moment, and then variable but broadly there or thereabouts for all other candidates – bar Norris whose potential vote is between 6 and 10 per cent depending on poll.
For Gallagher this is good news, short of another shift in opinion, perhaps caused by some late breaking information -and who given the trajectory of this campaign to date is going to dismiss the possibility of that. But I can’t help but feel that at this point any such news is probably too late in the day and we’d have heard about it earlier. There’s also the point, as someone articulated in comments last week, that success can sometimes generate its own momentum. Gallagher’s vote may increase as his electability, so to speak, or the perception of same, increases. In a way Gallagher with his somewhat irritating rhetoric of ‘vision’ and ‘singing songs’ is perhaps perfect for a job whose definition is so unclear. And all the reasons alluded to hear suggest why he has done so well and continues to do so.
For Higgins this is mixed news. So close. So close. Still able – at least according to the SBP analysis, to catch up since Higgins is more attractive to transfers than Gallagher. But… still some way off. If he does win it would look like it will be by a whisper – at least on current figures. Richard Colwell of RedC argues in the SBP that much will depend upon Martin McGuinness’s transfers but that they seem to trend to both the other candidates remaining more or less equally.
The McGuinness vote is very interesting. I’ve had a suspicion that his poll ratings may be somewhat under-recorded. Not by much, but perhaps by two or three percentage points. I wouldn’t be surprised if they were given the vitriolic nature of the attacks launched against him in the media and commentariat. And what do we see, a discrepancy of four points between 13 and 17 per cent in the SBP and ST respectively with the IT poll placing him on 15. If it’s the latter two figures I’d imagine SF would be very pleased indeed, and while yes McGuinness is presented as non-party the nature of the interactions during the campaign are such that the identification is very clearly with SF. That would mean that they had grown their vote by well over half its General Election figure in the space of the campaign.
Given what has been thrown at McGuinness that’s quite some achievement.
As for the rest? Well, who would have thunk it that figures like Norris and Mitchell would be polling in [mostly] single digits.
The Norris candidacy now seems in retrospect to have been misconceived, at least in its second part. In a way it seems to me that the animosity directed against him from various quarters was but a foreshadowing of the general melee which has ensued. But, I think he might have been better to stay outside the contest once he had decided to retreat the first time. That said he’s not doing that badly all things considered. If he gets anywhere close to 10 per cent he can rightly consider it something of a vindication, though I’m reminded of the Phoenix’s tart ‘funny’ feature where it noted that he was, to paraphrase his words on withdrawing over the Summer, ‘failing better’.
Davis is a mystery to me. Her campaign was sharp, at least in its promotion and presentation. She’s reasonably coherent and yet something about her hasn’t merely not connected but has positively – well, the word ‘repulsed’ comes to mind. I don’t get it. She seems like a fairly typical middle of the road, orthodox candidate so great passions on either side whether for or against seem oddly inappropriate. Though perhaps that’s precisely the problem.
And one can only gaze in wonderment at the continuing – almost literally – car-crash of the Dana campaign. I hate to speak ill of people, as distinct from speaking ill of their politics, but there’s been something utterly attention seeking about the enterprise from the start. And the more recent interventions she has made have seemed calculated merely to draw the spot-light to her, even those which are entirely counterproductive. That may be unfair, but it’s hard to credit her campaign with any strategy or nous. Even if the field had been thinned out it’s difficult to believe that her approach would have been successful.
And Mitchell? Well if FG had any illusions as regards the sort of rhetoric trotted out by the likes of Stephen Collins that they are the ‘biggest party’ in the country [surely he means state?] then those will now be long gone. Currently somewhere between 6 and 8 per cent and descending the Fine Gael candidate, unsuitable as he might be and so on, is shown to command less than 1 in every 10 people in the electorate. That’s shockingly poor and it will be interesting to see how FG processes this new information. It certainly will soften coughs all over. While not quite analogous to the local elections in 2009 which saw the FF vote tumble – if only because of the personalised nature of the Presidential contest – it still suggests an huge disconnect between party and voters. FG can’t even get ten per cent of an electorate that saw three times that number and more turn out for them at the General Election. And there’s Sinn Féin, potentially about to gain double the FG figure.
Pat Leahy makes the point in the SBP that ‘if the Labour candidate could persuade those Labour voters who say they will currently back Gallagher to switch to him, then the contest would be much closer, with Gallagher on about 36 per cent and Higgins on 30 per cent of FPV’. But that’s the problem described perfectly. Who are those ‘Labour voters’? In 2007 the party got 10.1 per cent of first preferences. In 2011 it got 17.4 per cent. But that 7.3 extra wasn’t made up of traditional loyal core voters, anymore than the FG vote which has jumped from 22.5 per cent in 2002 to 36.1 per cent in 2011 is made up of traditional loyal core voters. These are, very clearly, votes on loan to both parties and both parties need to take stock of that reality. So it’s not just down to Mitchell’s personality, dubious advantage that that may be. It’s down to basic structural aspects of the political system.
But where that leaves us when the result comes in…
Left Archive: Special Election Bulletin, Trinity College Dublin: Democratic Student Front [CPI M-L] 1973 October 24, 2011
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Communist Party of Ireland (Marxist Leninist), Irish Left Online Document Archive, The Internationalists.2 comments
To download the above please click on the following link: CPIMLTCD70s2
Many thanks to Tommy Graham for donating this to the Archive.
This document is a little unusual in respect to much of the Archive, being an election bulletin issued by the Democratic Student Front [established by the Communist Party of Ireland (Marxist-Leninist)] for elections to the Student Representative Council in Trinity College Dublin. The DSF was founded in April 1973 in order to contest those elections.
As it notes:
‘Everyone at the meeting was serious and optimistic about his new development in the progressive struggles of Trinity Students’.
This document presents the Draft Programme of the DSF which as the headline notes ‘Develops the Experience of The Internationalists’ Student Manifesto of 1968′. The use of language is particularly interesting. It argues the introduction that ‘Every clique in power in the SRC, from the Matthewsclique in 1968 which shamelessly collaborated and prostrated itself in front of the authorities and gave theme very encouragement in their plans to mislead and deceive the students, to the present pseudo-progressive Giles-Stephenson clique who have done the same’.
As regards the Draft Programme, this starts with the statement that:|
1. Trinity College is an anti-student, anti-people institution, and always has been.
Through its entire 382 year history, the Trinity College Authorities have done everything to support, first British colonialism, and now neocolonialism, backed mainly by British and US imperialism, nurture fascism and racism, and oppose the just struggles of the people of IReland and the world for emancipation from these evils. It trains the students to be small and big time lackey’s of imperialism. It has consistently developed the university as a breeding ground for colonialist and neocolonialist theories and has become renowned in the world for training colonial and neocolonial agents to execute these policies on behalf of British and US imperialism. It also encourages the use of the college as a platform for all pro-imperialist ideologues and politicians. It enthusiastically promotes and encourages all the research and scientific ‘development’ which can be used against the world’s people, and suppresses all the academic work which can serve the people.
Later it argues that:
All the 31 sets of SRC leaders have lauded it over the masses of the students and refused to be accountable for their actions to anyone. They have treated the organization as their own private property, and refused to admit that the masses of students have any role to play.
The following is of interest too:
16. The DSF candidates will put an immediate end to all corruption, graft, bribery, privileges, nepotism and free under-the-table handouts in the SRC and SRC-supported activities. The DSF candidates will put an immediate end to all squandering of student money through carelessness, laziness, indifference, opportunism and adventurism. The DSF candidates will resolutely oppose, and mobilize, the students against, any attempts by careerists, opportunists and budding bureaucrats to use the SRC to lord it over the masses of students, build their careers, or make personal gains.
And:
19. The DSF candidates will abolish all arbitrary rules and regulations in the SRC affairs, they will guarantee all students (who are not openly racist, fascist or imperialist) equal access to all their facilities (duplicating etc.).
All in all it’s a polemical, well produced, document that clearly carries its message and perhaps illustrates how the Communist Party of Ireland (Marxist-Leninist) was able to maintain a continuing presence in Trinity subsequently and is a useful addition to the Left Archive CPI (M-L) materials.
Sunday Independent Stupid Statement of the Week October 23, 2011
Posted by Garibaldy in Sunday Independent Stupid Statement of the Week.19 comments
Today’s front page seems not to be loading, so hope I haven’t missed anything there. I think we should just take the stupidity of the Brian Lenihan stuff as read, and concentrate on other stories. The Sindo this week is dominated by Brian Lenihan and Martin McGuinness. A winning combination I’m sure you’ll agree. But before continuing, a Press Ombudsman decision against the Sindo over its reporting of incidents around the Shell to Sea protests is worth noting.
Marc Coleman offers us the benefit of his expertise on the Greek situation.
But back to Europe. Saving it means doing four things, starting with sorting out the shambolic state of Greek public finances. Riots organised by powerful vested interests — who are rioting to protect bloated levels of public spending — show how difficult that is. Greek public spending is so delinquent it makes us look Swiss.
This is just shameful, and makes no attempt to temper its stupidity with a dose of reality.
Brendan O’Connor offers a critique of austerity, and says he has had enough of it, and that it’s time to concentrate on growing jobs. Seems perfectly sensible. However, then we get this.
Similarly, the Troika told us this time out that we have reduced the public sector sufficiently, so that Croke Park stands and no pay-cuts in the public sector are necessary. Obviously, in the real world, this is not true. But in the technical world of the memorandum, where it suits everyone for it to be true, it is considered true.
How do you end austerity and still cut the public sector? Maybe be dedicated to a neo-liberalism that got us here in the first place, and refuse to see its responsibility for that?
A fascinating insight into the mindset governing the Sindo from Aengus Fanning.
There are no heroes in this awful story, nor are there villains, much as it may gratify us emotionally to identify them.
Not even the public sector and the unions Aengus? Or could it be that you mean we shouldn’t consider the bankers, speculators, politicians and other members of the establishment who got us here as guilty? Hands down winner this week I think.
Some more thoughts on the Dublin West byelection… October 22, 2011
Posted by WorldbyStorm in Economy, Irish Politics, The Left.24 comments
On foot of IELB’s post here I was thinking only the other day how low key the Dublin West byelection is. Hardly surprising, there are two – count them, two – referendums also lost in the backwash, or is it slipstream, of the Presidential election. And yet the Irish Times, which is arguing strongly that it will be a Labour gain, argues that if so it will be the first byelection won by a government party in 29 years.
If it is Labour, and their candidate is curiously positioned as in and out of the tent in terms of his relationship to government policy [apparently he was agains the FG/LP coalition deal which is either admirable or cynical depending upon the political position of those critiquing him], then they must be thanking their lucky stars that this contest is being held ahead of December 6th which is now set as Budget day.
It’s an odd one. We know that the electorate is in a mood that can for want of a better term be described as indecisive. Opinion shifts first one way, then another. And yet, for all that, offered an actual election to the Dáil the support seems, at least from the soundings I’m hearing back from those involved in campaigns on the ground, to make an LP victory likely. Whether if Labour does win the seat this will be seen as an echo of the support for the party in Dublin as expressed during the General Election, or simply a product of the ‘tough’ decisions having not yet been taken may be difficult to divine. But who would bet on the party doing quite so well in the wake of the Budget. So perhaps small surprise, or none, to hear Patrick Nulty running the above mentioned fairly vague and ambiguous campaign of running with the government and throwing shapes about opposition. Whether that works for him remains to be seen.
But speaking of that it was slightly entertaining to see SP candidate Ruth Coppinger described as ‘plausible, serious and likable’ in the Irish Times. Damning with faint praise? And the Phoenix sort of follows suit. Though with more damning.
Coppinger is very much in the same mould as her one time boyfriend. Like many SP members she is strong on rhetoric, weak on detail and very dogmatic.
And here comes the faint praise.
But even her opponents on Fingal County Council concede that she is very hardworking, principled and with her finger on the pulse. Another mark of respect is that the same sources sya she is ‘very negative… sour’ and ‘not very nice’, qualities that are almost de rigueur for SP comrades’.
Yes. Well. Be that as it may… but you might wonder what’s really eating the Phoenix. In a one page profile it tells us next to nothing about her biography, her background, her expertise, bar the above. And then… and then… it suggests that despite the constituency being hard to read ‘but Coppinger could cause an upset’!
Conflicted is the word that springs to mind.
That said it’s also important to recognise that local issues and structural aspects of constituency politics will shape individual contests. National dynamics have an huge impact, obviously, as was proven by the decimation of Fianna Fáil at the last election, but there’s also the need to have structures extant in constituencies. On paper Dublin West would look good for the SP, but not necessarily so in a byelection where only one candidate can win. All this is pretty obvious stuff, but it does have ramifications for the future development of the ULA and its individual constituents – and indeed for SF and others.
In other words the Budgets won’t be the be all and end all, even, if as gloomily but crucially noted by Michael Taft this government has already extended the period of official austerity by at least one more year – and by the way, what sort of impact does that have on the Government parties fortunes?
One of the strangest aspects of the last election was to see SF and ULA TDs elected where their chances were either regarded as middling or very low. Justin… Jonathan O’Brien. election in Cork is a perfect example. That was the point where I began to think SF would breach 8 or 10 TDs. And to a degree, though her chances were always better, Joan Collins victory in Dublin, and perhaps equally so Richard Boyd Barrett. That the latter will have the fight of his life on at the next election in a contest where, most likely if Sean Barret retains the Cean Comhairle’s position the constituency will only have three seats available points to how local factors will weigh heavily, even if there is a fair wind for the ULA.
