jump to navigation

What you want to say – 8th March, Week 10, 2017 March 8, 2017

Posted by WorldbyStorm in Uncategorized.
trackback

As always, following on Dr. X’s suggestion, it’s all yours, “announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose”, feel free.

Comments»

1. Aengus Millen - March 8, 2017

All the talk about the FG leadership has made me wonder, if we take ideology out of it, who would I support as FG leader? They really don’t have a very deep bench if you look at those who got ministries after the 2011 election Noonan is tainted by overseeing austerity, Hogan and Reilly have been driven out of frontline politics, Shatter and Fitzgerald have been tainted by the Gardai scandal and Bruton has flown under the radar. Honestly maybe the reason it has come to Vradkar and Coveney is because they are the only ones who escaped the last government (notionally) unscathed despite the fact that Coveney has been unimpressive and Vradkar has been an active failure. There’s really no one with any positive leadership experience in the bunch. Can anyone think of a FG politician (ignoring ideology) who could be a good leader?

Like

Reply
enda_c - March 8, 2017

Six years of Kenny, Noonan and groups of well-respected advisers following the austerity politics laid down by the Troika and FF, with little regard to the most disadvantaged in society, means it’s nearly impossible to see beyond ideology. Forced at gunpoint to choose maybe Coveney, if only because Leo’s so-called liberalism is redolent of David Cameron’s. Any talk of the bright young things who are gonna take FG to a brighter tomorrow once Kenny pisses off is fanciful.
In the future a good leader might be, irrespective of party, one that treats the Minister for Health job seriously, and not as a political rite of passage that leads after a short period of time to a sense of entitlement for one of the, you know, serious Cabinet posts…

Like

Reply
2. irishelectionliterature - March 8, 2017

Big crowd in at the Strike4Repeal demo on O’Connell bridge at lunchtime. Lot’s of younger people there which was great to see.
It struck me that this is an issue that would previously have been a bastion of The Labour Party but it seems that their period in Government has damaged their Repeal credentials amongst the younger generation.

Like

Reply
3. sonofstan - March 8, 2017

Just back from a rather stark meeting about the future of my university. Won’t go into the details, but one of things that came up was students looking for a breakdown of what their fees were spent on. Now some courses are more expensive than others, involving tech and materials beyond chalk and a room to talk in (and a projector and screen). So students wonder why their all paying the same when ‘they’ get the use of expensive studios etc.

Which brings out the true horror of the fees system – because to students, it appears as a ‘price’, a payment for an individual package of goods and services, so they look for ‘value’. Whereas, in fact it’s a tax, and like tax, it’s meant to be a collective fund out of which collective goods are paid for. So, just because I don’t have kids of school age anymore and am normally healthy and haven’t used either the education or health system here to any great degree, doesn’t mean I should pay less income tax than someone who leans heavily on both.

And, of course, given the way, in most cases, it’s collected as loan repayments, it functions as a tax – but by being presented as a price, it appears to empower the student as a consumer while in fact disempowering them as citizens. And, of course, you can’t even blame the Tories, because it was Labour wot done it (initially)

Like

Reply
sonofstan - March 8, 2017

‘they’re’ all paying the same.

Like

Reply
enda_c - March 8, 2017

On your point, have heard of unis in Britain that can, and do, undermine course standards by including final year options that are seen as the way to go to achieve 2:1s or suchlike. Studying Harry Potter or bullshit as such. He who pays the piper etc is the attitude; too few undergraduates are likely to be concerned about what that means for the future

Like

Reply
sonofstan - March 8, 2017

Of course we do.
Students go off on skiing trips and then demand one-to-one tutorials to cover what they missed. Becuase they’re the customer.

Liked by 1 person

Reply
WorldbyStorm - March 9, 2017

It’s a totally pernicious dynamic you describe SoS. Seen some of that at first hand here too.

Like

4. DBR1590 - March 8, 2017

Anyone shed any light on this?

Like

Reply
fergal - March 9, 2017

Stab in the dark- Galloway had been in Dublin for a troops out march on the 20th anniversary of deployment of british army up north. MacGiolla decided to talk sense to him but Galloway wasn’t having any of it?

Like

Reply
oconnorlysaght - March 9, 2017

MacGiolla talking sense ?

Like

Reply
fergal - March 9, 2017

– ‘talk sense’ as defined by a stalinist like macgiolla

Like

Reply
FergusD - March 10, 2017

It was a slander (or whom you may ask!) because Galloway isn’t a Trotskyist

Like

WorldbyStorm - March 9, 2017
5. roddy - March 9, 2017

McGiolla’s “sense” resulted in one side of the 1970 split being outpolled 100 to 1 by the other side last week.

Like

Reply
WorldbyStorm - March 9, 2017

I’m not sure one can draw a line between his approach to Galloway and to last weeks excellent result.

Like

Reply
6. roddy - March 9, 2017

His approach in 1970 split the Republican movement,and his analysis from the mid 70s on was proved to be increasingly wrong culminating in total failure.

Like

Reply
WorldbyStorm - March 9, 2017

I’d agree that the analysis was off but on the other hand it’s not necessarily the best thing in the world to replace one dubious version of historical inevitability/determinism with another. There were some necessary but pretty fundamental changes along the way from 1970 by many of those involved (and I do not in any sense underestimate the difficulties and challenges involved in those changes). If any of those changes hadn’t been made where would matters be today? Or what if matters had gone slightly differently – say, Tory governments throughout the 1990s? Or who knows what?

Like

Reply
RosencrantzisDead - March 9, 2017

Feck’s sake, roddy, the Shinners had a great election and still you are bitter.

You’ll give yourself an ulcer.

Like

Reply
Ed - March 10, 2017

Starter for 10: who was the first president of Provisional Sinn Féin after the 1970 split? What was the key issue for him in deciding to break with the Officials? And what line did he take when the Provos later decided to adopt the same position on that issue as the Officials in 1986?

Is the current SF line in the North—acceptance of British rule for the time being, rejection of armed struggle, internal reform to dismantle Orange supremacy—exactly the same as what the Provos were saying in the early 70s? Or was there another organization back them with a somewhat similar line?

You see, anyone can play this game of ‘events vindicated our stance’. It’s not very helpful, is it?

Liked by 1 person

Reply
7. Starkadder - March 10, 2017

Oh dear. She’s back.

https://www.todayfm.com/Mary-Ellen-Synon:-I-was-so-happy-when-Brexit-happened

Mary Ellen Synon has returned to Ireland and gave an interview last month saying we should “Join Britain” and leave the EU. She also gushed over Donald Trump and the “wonderful” Steve Bannon, and repeated the fairy-story that Breitbart cannot be an anti-Semitic website because it supports Israel. She also says the negative coverage of Trump is only due to “raving Democratic” outlets which are dying.

Shame Matt Cooper didn’t ask Synon about her White Supremacist father, John J, Synon, who ” distributed works of scientific racism through the Patrick Henry Press”:

What you want to say – 10th February 2016

Like

Reply
Dr. X - March 11, 2017

After her comment that the lives of disabled people were of “less value”, I’m actually angry that she’s allowed to show her face in Ireland.

Like

Reply
8. roddy - March 10, 2017

I did’nt bring McGiolla into the post.I was responding to someone suggesting that he was a font of wisdom ,lecturing Galloway on the North.

Like

Reply
Liberius - March 10, 2017

I’d imagine that the ‘sense’ was sarcastic, maybe you should relax yourself roddy with this little video about Baguettes

Like

Reply
fergal - March 10, 2017

Roddy- I didn’t mean to imply that macgiolla was a font of wisdom on the north …at all. Other people would know better than me but by 89 the WP had become very supportive of ruc/b.a. and had essentially become neo- unionists..galloway didn’t buy this line, so macgiolla took it upon himself to talk(his version of) sense to him

Like

Reply
WorldbyStorm - March 10, 2017

Yes, I’d agree fergal re the point of the WP’s line particularly by the mid-to late 80s. It was quite bizarre for me as a member in the South who would go naturally go on marches against miscarriages of justice to enter a parallel world where there was meant to be ‘suport’ for the police etc in the North. Though perhaps I wasn’t the best member of the party from their perspective in that regard.

Like

Reply
9. Jolly Red Giant - March 10, 2017

All the SF candidates in last weeks Assembly election refused to sign a pledge to support the extension of the 1967 Abortion Act to the North.

Tonight in the Dail SF abstain on a vote to abolish the 14 year prison sentence for having an abortion.

Like

Reply
GW - March 10, 2017

SF has to shift on that issue if it is to be taken seriously as a non-sectarian and feminist political entity.

Like

Reply
10. roddy - March 10, 2017

Fair enough Fergal.

Like

Reply
11. CL - March 10, 2017

“”We have a very clear agreement that we will not go back to a hard border, which brought with it sectarian violence and all of that before.”-Enda Kenny.
http://www.rte.ie/news/politics/2017/0310/858609-eu-leaders-to-discuss-plans-to-mark-treaty-of-rome/

Like

Reply
12. roddy - March 10, 2017

SF gets plenty of stick for it’s support for “limited “abortion from right wingers in the North and then the likes of JRG slam them for not being sufficiently liberal on the subject.It has only come to my attention that all the Left governments in latin America (bar Cuba) would have had similar positions to SF. In fact some of them would have been less progressive than SF on the issue.

Like

Reply
Jolly Red Giant - March 10, 2017

SF claims to be a ‘left’ party (although Adams has been distancing from this recently), claims to be in favour of repeal – yet when it has an opportunity to oppose a draconian piece of anti-women legislation it chooses to abstain.

Who gives a sh*t what the right-wing bigots in the North think – the fact that SF is willing to 1. Oppose the extension of the 1967 Abortion Act to the North and now, 2. refuse to back the abolition of this draconian peice of legislation demonstrates that SF are willing to make compromises to the reactionary right.

As for the ‘left’ governments in Latin Americca – you will need a microscope to find those. There is a difference between ‘left’ and populist – although you can see how SF might not get the difference.

Like

Reply
13. roddy - March 10, 2017

JRG,how wrong of me to label Chavez as “left”.However the SP seems to have had a peculiar attitude to abortion in the North too.When its sole councillor ever in the North Johnny McLoughlin adopted a strident anti abortion line,it was left to SP guru Peter Hadden to clear things up.Johnny was questioned and said he might have abstained if he had known party policy.However Peter then said “particular circumstances” might come into play on occasion. Peter said “Abortion while an important issue is not a make or break question for our party” “We have never insisted on support for a pro choice position as a condition of membership of our party” “We have had and still have comrades who are extremely active in building the party who remain opposed to abortion” Google “Johnny McLoughlin SP on abortion” and the indymedia article in question will give you plenty to ponder on!

Like

Reply
Jolly Red Giant - March 10, 2017

Being pro-choice is not and never has been a membership requirement for the SP – but the SP is and always has been a pro-choice party. John McLoughlin was anti-abortion but agreed after this incident to abide by SP policy and support the pro-choice position of the party in future. John McLoughlin left the SP more than 20 years ago.

Now stop trying to deflect – stop trying to dodge.

Last week SF refused to support the extension of abortion rights to the North.

This week SF refused to support a proposal to abolish a draconian 14year sentence for a woman who has had abortion.

Like

Reply
14. roddy - March 10, 2017

But your guru said io 02 that “abortion was’nt a make or break issue ” for your party.

Like

Reply
Jolly Red Giant - March 11, 2017

roddy – stop the dodging, stop the diversion – address the issue.

SF had an opportunity to support a proposal to abolish a draconian measure imposing a 14 year sentence on a woman who has an abortion – SF refused to support this.

Now address the issue – explain the actions of SF in the Dail on Thursday night and justify the decision to refuse to protect women from this draconian piece of legislation.

Like

Reply
15. roddy - March 11, 2017

Maybe as Hadden said “particular circumstances” came into play on this occasion on this non “make or break issue”!

Like

Reply
Jolly Red Giant - March 11, 2017

Not a ‘make or break’ for party membership

Now stop dodging and answer the question

Explain why SF refused to support the abolition of a 14 year prison sentence for a woman who has an abortion.

Like

Reply
16. roddy - March 11, 2017

Sure Johnny “the wig” was told ” particular circumstances” would have allowed him to abstain before he jumped ship for his OBE like all the other SDLP rejects who went to accept imperialist honours after a term of Anglicisation in the SP.!

Like

Reply
Jolly Red Giant - March 11, 2017

Answer the question roddy – stop trying to deflect with 25 year old nonsense.

Like

Reply
17. roddy - March 11, 2017

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!

Like

Reply
Jolly Red Giant - March 11, 2017

go on roddy – make an effort – defend SF’s refusal to vote for the proposal

Like

Reply
18. sonofstan - March 11, 2017

Nonsense you find on the internet: Ireland is the 8th most socialist country in the world. We’ve won lads.

http://blog.peerform.com/top-ten-most-socialist-countries-in-the-world/

Like

Reply
Gerryboy - March 13, 2017

Ireland must be one of the most good-humoured countries in the world. Let’s spread it around the globe on St. Patrick’s Day.

Like

Reply
19. oconnorlysaght - March 11, 2017

Comparatively, does the net provide evidence for the ROI being more or less ‘actually socialist’ than the USSR from c1935?

Like

Reply
20. sonofstan - March 13, 2017

“Almost a fifth of UK academics in 2015-16 were from the EU”

The Guardian, just now.
Actually, of course, the proportion is much higher since UK academic from the UK are ALSO FROM THE EU. (sorry)

Like

Reply
21. Starkadder - March 13, 2017
22. GW - March 13, 2017

Brexit just got even more complicated.

The SNP want another independence referendum before the Brexit negotiations have ended – end of 2018, beginning 2019.

Fully understandable from their point of view – the one third of waverers won’t be much impressed with what – if anything – the stellar fantasy-negotiation team the Tories have assembled have managed to make clear by then. i.e. probably Nada, Zilch, Nichts.

I’d imagine dunderheads like Davis will imagine they can go to the wire and the EU will cave in at the last moment.

Whatever happens, the foreigners (or Scots) will be to blame.

Like

Reply
GW - March 13, 2017

Sturgeon:

“The language of partnership has gone completely. If Scotland can be ignored on an issue as important as the membership of the EU, it is clear our voice and interests can be ignored at any time.” The SNP leader said tshe wanted May to get a good deal from the EU, and would fight for Scotland’s interests during that process.

“But I am far from alone in fearing a bad deal or indeed no deal. Nor am I alone in fearing that even a so-called good deal will be significantly inferior to membership of the single market and that it will set Scotland on a course that will not only damage our economy but change the very nature of the society and country that we are.

“The problem with doing nothing now is that by the time these fears are realised it would be too late for Scotland to choose a different path.”

Liked by 1 person

Reply
23. Tomboktu - March 14, 2017
Gerryboy - March 15, 2017

All you need is love. Cross-sectarian couplings and lifelong marriage are possible. Partners can agree to disagree about what Lenin wrote in 1912 and Trotsky said in 1919, or Orwell wrote in 1937 and just get on with raising a happy revolutionary family of screaming socially engaged kids.

Like

Reply

Leave a comment