New Lamps for Old

by giggle Sun Jul 15, 2007 12:23

Everyone has to cut their cloth to their measure and It might be time for the PD's to recognise they are an independent grouping without technical status who are supporting a FF government. They've flat-lined, failed to convince the Irish middle class public that they've a role to play in changing Irish society. I reckon they should sell off the posh office on Fitzwilliam street and invest the money in smearing Ahern. I honestly believe Harney was re-elected on a combination of sympathy factor and vote rigging. At end many of her constituents saw the clash with consultants in a completely different light to those in other PD strongholds. Messrs Parlon and Mcdowell counted on votes from people who use the services of consultants and remember their names and even shop around for good ones. That is one reason why the nurses angle was played badly by the other flat-liners (Labour) and well most people. Though curiously the nurses appeared themselves to reject leftie support on their campaigns wanting to pitch to the same politically central lobby which had shafted them all along. The nurses ought have led into the election day not the anaesthetists. We can see that clearly over the news archives. It was indymedia regulars who reported on the nurses strikes actions not nurses themselves. Even a swp leaflet offer was spurned. I hope you can save them Sean. I like you relish the ironic. But a new leader is generally the way to go. no? or they could merge / be absorbed....."liberal labour" the LL little party.....for young people.

by SadState Sat Jul 14, 2007 21:42

and a wonderful eh..eh..orator, a man of great tact, courage and vision....eh....and anyone who disagrees can just kill themselves

Fuck the PD's and your forelock tugging speculation. I hope they rot. They represent the worst policies that capitalism has to offer. The fact that that evil witch mary harney got any votes at all makes me puke and lose all faith in the human ability to understand the reality around them.

Why do so few people seem to want a humane society? just this money driven fuckup

I've given up on the stupid people who live in this country and vote for criminals who rob us blind and fuck us over and who will leave us like a third world country when the favourable economic conditions they were lucky enough to inherit and exploit for the last ten years shift and leave us with privatised everything, no income from our natural resources, blood on our hands, no public transport infrastructure worth talking about and a fucked up environment.

With nothing to look forward to but going in every day of the rest of my stressed life to my stupid job that barely pays the rent and food and no voice in what happens in my society, I'm truly fed up. It feels like there is no escape from the ennui of my pointless modern day slavery.

I'd go kill myself but society makes even that option very difficult, even if you are in constant pain from a terminal disease. Wouldn't want the slaves not coming into work because they found a humane way out would we? You have to choose a method that is horrible, traumatic and very painful. If bertie is truly serious, he should at least make it easier for us to kill ourselves.

How about it bertie?

by Greyblogger Sat Jul 14, 2007 20:59

Then again it might just possibly be that the policies of the self-styled "Progressive Democrats" are fundamentally reactionary and are recognised as such by the electorate. The PR games played by party leaders are only "smoke & mirrors". It is unfortunate that you do not realise that. Policies are what really matter.

As for "young leadership, a smaller scale of operation"! Well the "smaller scale of operation" bit is definitely on the cards after the last election, but if you want "young leadership" then that raises the more general issue of ageism and exclusion of people in my (and your) age bracket. Perhaps I should stress at this point that I would never join the self-styled ""Progressive Democrats" who are (obviously) neither progressive nor democratic, but my point is that by placing the emphasis on "young leadership" you are automatically excluding people with very valuable experience.

The concept of leadership itself is another aspect worth analysis. You rightly complain about a "rank of anointed people whose voices were listened to" while others were ignored. That is the modus operandi of all hierarchic organisations, surely you do not expect some kind of democracy within such bodies? You can be sure too that these "anointed people" are generally reactionary rather than progressive. Why look for leaders? You yourself probably know more about the people of this country than the present PD leadership. Looking for others to lead them is a characteristic of most party hacks. It indicates to me that they are lacking in confidence in their own abilities. We only have to look back sixty + years to see where following leaders takes us.

I really don't see much analysis in your article, it just comes across as the incoherent ramblings of someone who is politically very confused, And that shows in your choice of party.

by Beg to differ Sat Jul 14, 2007 20:55

I am surprised that anyone would seek to emulate what appears to be a catalogue of expedience,
cheating and bullying through the last ten years. As to the PD's, well, really, they do not count ,they
belong and have belonged on the business end of corporate politics and Parlon is at least
honest enough to follow the money. Their years with FF have been a gratuitous attempt to abuse
office in order to further the concerns of their friends in pharm/biotech and construction.
Bertie Ahern is really quite useless but at least he is not a sociopath, like Mc Dowell was.
Is this then what we value in politics, the endless exposures of wrong doing in the tribunals,
the amoral lifestyle of the ne'er do well. The relation to Tony Blair and George Bush?
btw- the photo is neither Bertie nor Michael??