Ireland General Discussion

[Јas]

I'm going to carry this discussion on education in Ireland over from another thread, mainly so as not to derail the other thread (on the global warming debate).

I suppose it depends on what you expect/want out of an education system. Our system wasn't developed with the aim of producing a large number of citizen philosophers certainly.

Well Obviously. I don't want "Citizen philosophers" - Citizens yes, the basis of our modern civilisation is the idea of constant questioning and participation with the processes which dominate the world around us (the most Irish people do in that regard is vote; if even that and most don't vote on the basis I've just mentioned.) yet the ability to ask questions is not even taught in school. I don't want to spend too long on this as this distracts from the basis of this thread (Though I *Could* bore for Ireland on this topic.) but it seems pretty obvious that the why Global warming is debated has it origins in the way these things are taught in School.

It's more a matter of teaching basic skills with the hope of ending up with at least the semblance of a capable workforce. In primary school the focus is on literacy and numeracy (and on Irish - but this is for cultural and historical reasons more so than for any educational benefit - which isn't to deny that there may be educational benefit to it). In secondary, this process continues with more developed literacy and numeracy skills, languages, and some vocational subjects (sciences; accounting; woodwork; tech graphics; home ec; etc.).

And I think, by and large, the system reaches its primary objective - it does produce a capable workforce.

I didn't say that the system doesn't work in what it's aims are. Just that it's aims are alot of crap - I don't like the idea of entire generations being processed in this way so that they work for some business and consume more.

I think the aim of producing a potential workforce is a legitimate one. It's quite simply necessary for our economy to function. Literacy and numeracy rates are very high. Over half of our young people now go on to third level education. Advancement through the education system is now reasonably meritocratic. I think these are all positives.

I don't think that it's the education system which is responsible for the rise of consumer culture or conspicuous consumption.

Is there any wonder therefore that our Democracy is so degraded

Our levels of electoral turnout aren't bad. We have free and open elections at multiple levels and regular referenda to boot. We have the rule of law; solid Constitutional protections; and human rights legislation.

Sure, I'm not delighted with the current crop of politicans - but the people giveth and the people can taketh away. I don't think I can agree that our democracy is 'degraded'.

and our culture is so mind numbingly dumb?

Is Irish culture dumb?

Anne Enright has just won the Man Booker Prize, just two years after John Banville. Not all that long ago Seamus Heaney won the Nobel for Literature. Of course, I would be writing for quite some time if I was to even just list highly rated Irish writers from times past and indeed present, be they poets, novelists, playrights, etc. We're not lacking in terms of filmmakers, musicians or comedians either. Beyond the arts, we have a strong sporting culture; our own language and our own 'take' on another.

I think as a nation we stand out and this is strongly helped by a strong sense of cultural identity.

Almost quite ancillary to that process, it does allow for a certain amount of 'education' in the meaning which I think you intend, but this is almost circumstantial as it's not really the intent. And with the development of the 'points race', education in this sense will only be hindered as both student and teacher must focus on a fairly rigid structure which becomes much more a test of memory than of intelligence.

No doubt about that on any of the points you've mentioned; Personally I still consider it a great achievement of mine that I just didn't give a Sh!t when coming onto my Junior and Leaving certs unlike all those "Daddy wants to me to do Medicine" types (For the Americans here; getting into a Medicine or law course in Ireland has obscene requirements; The Leaving cert exam is the final exam taken at the end of your final year at Secondary school which alone determines how one makes it into college.) who were usually I found were rather notable of their airheadness despite their getting 500+ Points. The people I would consider most intelligent in School who were often the ones you didn't at all give the system any respect while still playing an active role in the school and had a genuine curiousity about "The Real World" (So not the Rugby Jocks).

In short, Exams are the dumbest possible way in the history of mankind to test intelligence.

A few small points.

I do think that changes should be made to second level education in the country in a number of areas, but one stong point in favour of the points system is that it is a completely objective, impartial system. It's nice to know that it doesn't matter who you are in terms of your family background or class or where you're from or whatever - the CAO computer will treat everyone the same. But I'll certainly agree with you on the lack of definitive correlation between points and intelligence, something that I surprised time and again in college.

Secondly, I don't think many Leaving Cert exam setters would claim that their papers test 'intelligence', they test knowledge in a particular subject area. One's intelligence per se isn't officially tested, but then why should it?

[Јas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I never said they weren't positive; just that we should aspire to more than that. It depends on whether we wish to see ourselves more as a society driven by ideals or purely by economic concerns; all goverments over the past 150 years or so have chosen the latter.

2 questions:
Who decides what those ideals should be?
What would you like those ideals to be?

Though personality from experience I think it's waste of time to have about half of the student population in education after the age of 14 (to pick a rough estimate).. and if we keep the current situation as it is I don't think employers will complain too much on missing out learning Intregal Calculus or Bismarck's Foreign Policy.

Presumably though those students who would leave at age 14 would (hopefully) enter the workforce. They are likely to find themselves in unskilled employment prone and subject to economic insecurity. Under the current system (whatever the value of the 'education' they are receiving) their future economic prospects increase with every year in the system they complete.

But I don't think have such an industrial like system of Education is good for Children or inevitably for Society as a whole. Also those Literacy and Numeracy statistics you state are very relative; how do you define those terms? (I not saying that Ireland has a bad standard here or anything; but statistics in this tend to vary alot on criteria.)

Certainly the literacy and numeracy stats are relative. I could try and look up the stats and how they're calculated - my assertion is based simply on my own observations in this regard. For want of anything better though, I would suggest that anyone who can pass the Ordinary Level Junior Cert papers in English and Maths easily clear the bar as far as literacy and numeracy are concerned. The vast majority surpass this (completely arbitrary and on the spot) standard.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not Directly. But in a much more subtle indirect way I would so say.

Let me put this way, each class in a school has a structure and that structure is pretty unchanged from the age of 4 to 18 in the Irish system. That structure is there is a teacher who is the centre of the class who is supposed to be font of the required curriculum (more on that later..) and then there are the children who rarely speak and "recieve" knowledge from the teacher, who generally rewards them somehow if they do well and absconds them if they don't. Now as this is seen as the "natural" way of teaching it may not be seen as a big deal, but there are assumptions in this method here which are very important to point out and it is this that is most often imparted in school as opposed to the "official" curriculum (Most Children forget roughly 80% iirc of all the content they learn in a class once it's over. But here I refer to is the "Hidden Curriculum" - what is learnt without even being recognized; the sort of training you get sitting in a similiar position for 14 years straight.)

1) Authority Figures, like Parents (Here Teachers) are genuinely seen to be the holders of knowledge, knowledge and education is what the teacher gives you.

Surely though parents and teaches are, in fact, holders of knowledge and they do impart impart knowledge to their students?

2) In schools there are textbooks which give out this knowledge; which creates a division between the learning in "School" and "non-school" learning. Textbooks are useless when learning things outside of the school enviorment

Books contain information/ideas; different books are useful in different contexts. I don't really understand the point being made here either.

3) All Questions have "right" and "wrong" answers which are not to be doubted as they held by the authority figure to be truth; accepting the "right" answer (regardless of whether it is 2+2=4 or to be more nebelous, a good story.) without question is the name of the game. ("The first thing you learn in school is to learn how to lie - HL Mencken) Those who are wrong; perhaps because they are just not interested in the subject or just don't have academic ability in it are often punished - a system where praise (and thus Status; especially towards ones parents who love to have straight A grade child) and derision is often given out by how much you accept what the teacher says. So it's no surprise that the least gifted (or for that matter, the most gifted) get alienated from the system.

Well, I don't think the system instills the idea that there are only right or wrong answers, anymore - though certainly in many cases it is perfectly clear cut that answers are right or wrong (most clearly in maths, for example). Depends on the individual subject and the teacher, the extent to which there is a willingness to accept as valid very different answers.

I don't necessarily disagree with the remainder of your statement here though.

4) Our civilisation, which is based on Questions, is not even taught in schools. It's an Authoritian system of knowledge driven mainly by an industrial set up. (Ever noticed how Schools and Offices are often alike? Or Schools and Prisons for that matter?)

How do you come to the conclusion that our civilisation is based on questions?

(And by the by, I'd acceot similarities between schools and offices - to an extent; but I feel that the school/prison analogy doesn't really hold up.)

Now of course here I'm really referring to the first years of Education which are formative of the rest of Ireland's formal system.

But add to this the Curriculum, We both know about the pointless endavour of Irish and the Cultural\Political reasons behind it. But let's look more closely at how each subject (and that's another thing - that division is totally arbirtary. Another thing you learn in School, History is History, Maths is Maths, English is English, Mechanacial engineering is Mechanacial
engineering. And never the twain shall meet. I'm a believer in the idea to have true understanding of anything you need to understand it's history. But this form of Education I'm referring to how has nothing to do with Understanding) is taught and what is taught.

- Maths: Actually I think in the Irish system the teaching of Maths is one of the better things about it as shows coginitive ability at abstract taught and unlike most another subjects can't really be bluffed at an exam. But here again comes into my point about the division of ideas; in Maths education we never shown why Calculus? The idea of learning is divorced from function; while I'm not a fan of the idea that education should be "relevant" in Mediaspeak (in other words, made fit into a way which suits students who cram for exams) I just think that this is yet another example of the idea the system alienates students; many of whom actually are interested in knowing stuff. Not to mention that Maths must be continued till age 18; against the interests of most students. Even from the functional POV this is mass Stupidity; if Children show no ability at Maths why keep them on after say 12 once numerical ability becomes obvious; will they repent once they hit Algebra and decide to become Engineers? Don't be silly.

Agree with a lot of this.
Essentially forcing students to stick with Maths to the Leaving is a fruitless endeavour. I'd be quite happy to see it become optional post-Junior Cert.

I also think the fact that Maths can't really be bluffed and does require some active problem solving skills that can't fully be by-passed by rote learning to be a good thing - though this is exactly the reason why (IMO) so many students fear Maths exams.

[Јas]

- History: This is a particular issue of mine; let's take the Junior Cert History Syllabus I did back in 2003 - or to be more precise the exam itself (The paper is here: http://www.examinations.ie/archive/exampapers/2003/JC004ALP1EV.pdf) to keep things simple I gave I kept to the essay questions:

Example A: Write one of three following personal accounts:
- A lord or lady of a Medevil Castle.
- A farmer in Pre-Christian Ireland
- A named Religious reformer.

This is a form of biography; but in the end of Trivial biography. Actually that's 80% of Irish schools teach is trivia. When discussing Luther or Pre-Christian Ireland the textbooks usually went into fairly detailed (for 15 year olds) information about personal lives; but they failed to show why these things matterd; why they should be taught; what is their impact today In other words; it created a totally artifical division between history and the present. The fractured nature of the curriculum (inevitable in such a short space of time) makes this issue even worse. In other words, the majority of information students learn about history is school is mainly the gather of trivia; such as say the lives of Lords and ladies - purely an academic interest - without even the idea of context. I believe History matters too much to be divorced from the modern day world like it is in school (and I won't go into how school textbooks often try to justify Irish Nationalism.. it's not that their wrong per se; but rather that they are ideological at all. But then again I'm against textbooks)

Again, don't really disagree a great deal.

Though I would note that on the Leaving Cert History paper, the requirement of a research piece attempts to get around the simple fact regurgitation element to an extent, by requiring the student to actively pursue his own historical research on a subject of their own choosing.

I'd also suggest that writing a non-ideological book on history may well be an effort in futility - or would simply reduce history to a list of facts or figures. The best that might be achievable is to try and openly acknowledge the biases/ideologies at play.

Now I'm running out of space; and I want to watch the Rugby. And I've even explained my starting point. I told you I could bore for Ireland on this topic. If you to learn what I actually stand for and put the above in a much more coherent manner that there is Neil Postman's book Teaching as a subversive activity - 40 years old but still very, very relevant. And to be brief, here is what I am for: The Socratic Method

Ah, the Socratic method. I've had some experience with a newbie law lecturer (recently returned from the States, where I understand this method is widely used in law schools) who tried to operate a class in this manner. He had to give up very quickly, as of course nobody would answer his questions.

Not that I've got anything against the Socratic method itself - indeed I've been known to use it in everyday life and indeed on occasion in this forum - but I'm not sure how workable it would be. It depends upon the class being willing to volunteer effort and answers - and I suspect it would actually help the distinction between students the teacher approves of and disapproves of, much more than the current system.

South Africa won.. Yay!

Now you may be wondering, But Gully what does that have to do with Consumerism?.. Well.. Quite a bit.

The decisions we make as adults are conditioned by the events and surroundings of our childhood; of which School is clearly an important part (but how important is difficult to determine) and as I have shown imo the two most vital things one learns in school is 1) how to adapt to the social structure; a classroom is like an office, an industrial plant, etc in it's hierachial structure those that succeed are often those who play best to the system (not neccesarily the most intelligent; not even always the most book smart) and 2) the distinction between what is important and what is not is based on trivia (such as the lives of Lord and ladies of manors) and not in any way connected to the tangiable world outside.

Therefore this feeds into consumerism and alienation felt often by those of lesser class as well; okay I don't think it's the main factor for the rise of consumerism or alienation but it does exist. Any system which rewards the ability to think inside the system is almost incestuous; outside ideas are dangerous.. and as schools don't teach the ability to question the world around the students or even engage in it in a serious way then it creates an enviorment of distance between "intellectualism" and "the real world"; which is seen to be highly desirable and whose status in which is often marked by material goods.

I don't see how the conclusion (highlighted in red) follows from the preceeding points (which I largely agree with).

Here I quote Postman twice, as he is more eloquent than me on this topic:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Largely agree with the first quote, disagree with the second.

I don't believe that the school curriculum was designed to misdirect students from some form of higher truth. In fact, I'd suggest that those forming it have the best of intentions (whether or not I agree with their decisions).
I also disagree that the suggestion that some students have an economic stake in the system and that others do not, purely on the basis of their economic status.

[Јas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You are making the fatal (and very common) mistake of confusing elections with Democracy; Democracy is about debate and there is almost none of that in Ireland right now. The business of elections is dominated by Media machines and other Financial interests which often try and shy away from what is known as "The issues" and when "The issues" are confronted by any party it usually ends that all the parties nearly speak from the same hymn sheet.

Watch Questions & Answers much? Then you know what a joke "debate" in this democracy consists of. And if we don't have debate and discussion among the populace about where we are going and what is our function as a society and how it should be ordered than all we doing is handing power over to (an often morally bankrupt) Political class which wields power as is it's will. Which is what has happened all over the western world; and is growing more and more Authoritian. And whatever opposition there is tends to come from extremism (of both left and right) and from Waco-type conspiracists.

Actually, completely disagree.
There is a non-ceasing debate of political issues in a media very hungry to fill newspapers/webpages/radio and TV time. Everyone's voice can be heard on all of these platforms, again by a media eager to fill time/space with the opinions of anyone wiling to express them.

While debate is important, I would stand by the assertion that it is elections which are the fundamental. And as I've already stated, you, me or anyone else is free to project a message to the people for it to be judged.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You are again making another mistake; using high culture as a barometer. When I meant culture I refererred in general to what the average person does with his life outside of the parameters of work, etc - what does (s)he do, what is his\her reason to be and how is this shown in a mass context?. A book by Jordan outsold all the man Booker entries combined in the UK; should I don't think that Enright entirely defines what I am describing.

What I am describing though is mainly RTE and the tabloids and the aforementioned consumerism, and no I don't try to be some patrician who looks down upon the habits of the plebs as inferior to my own (actually that last bit of that second Postman quote is very relevant here.) and I would not consider myself the most "cultured" person myself; far from it. But there are certain cultures which are compitable with democracy and those that are not; Ireland's present values (or even historical ones; replace consumerism with "The Catholic Church") Imo are not compitable to the true idea of Democracy.

Ah, but then what is there inherently wrong with the culture the 'average man' engages with? Whether it be Jordan's book or whatever - surely one can't decide that one form of culture is more or less valid than any other? And if the man freely chooses Jordan over Enright, or vice versa, what does that have to do with our democracy?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's Meritocratic only in theory. Anyone whose ever been to a Rugby school on the Southside of Dublin can tell you this easily. Grind Schools, anyone? (Which I despise as they are the opposite of education; though I'm not complaining about how I got a B in leaving cert Classical studies thanks to attending one. Hey, if the system is there to be abused and you have the means..)

Anyway in terms of Class most of the real problems already begin once the baby is out of the womb; never mind schooling.

Disagree again. While it's certainly not perfectly meritocratic and money can certainly help, I still feel that there is a large meritocratic element to it.

Money doesn't buy you grades, but it can buy you the ability to force your child into a 'school' wherein they will be forced to engage with the material. This doesn't mean that the system still isn't meritocratic, whatever their motives (or maybe more properly the motives of their parents), they will still face the same paper on the same terms as the rest of us. And I can say plainly, that the rest of us are doing better and going further because of this system (and because of free university education) than ever before. Social mobility is more visible than ever.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It only tests the ability to regurgitate trivia. Which is sometimes mistaken for intelligence.

Ah, well then the problem is with those who (mistakenly) have that perception, not necessarily with the exam itself.

[Јas]

OK, well I agree with most of that, especially...

I hate the Sunday Independent.

You're not alone.
Otherwise, I've just got one (very) tangential question.

See the above point about unquestioned leaders and where the answer comes from. Textbooks especially need to questioned. How much distortions are in an average school history textbook?

Well, unless the book is covering matters of which I have personal experience, then it's very difficult for me to say that just about anything therein is a distortion unless the book directly contradicts itself; or, someone else (preferably many other people with some evidence) asserts that there is a distortion.

[Јas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because:
1) School as it is trains you for the patterns of life you will gain as an adult
2) School as it is, is based around not questioning but accepting said ideas (and fitting it into examinations.)

Right now in Ireland the dominant way of thinking is Consumerism; especially in certain areas near where I live (Ever been to Dundrum? It's hell) while it used to be the Catholic Church. By accepting certain ideas as fact it doesn't prepare to pupils to challenge the accepted order of things around the world. Which is why the school system supports consumerism, at least in an indirect manner (not too dissimiliar to way even secular schools managed in a way to support the Catholic church during it's hegemony; The Church's apparent popular collapse though is quite an interesting case study on how attitudes change and why. But that would need a post all to it's self.)

Well, I would have thought that the fact that the hegemony has changed from Catholicism to Consumerism is evidence in itself against the theory that schools produce persons effectively indoctrinated into accepting the system as is; and indeed that it's not possible for those very same students may not change the system.

Plus on the second half of that quote is still relevant on how pupils see themselves; the attitude of "I will be a burger flipper forever" (not too uncommon) is not exactly conjusive to a good education in the current system. Not too mention that among certain (especially working) classes it was traditional to value work above education (which in the long term was not hugely beneficial for their children, and retarded any attempt at social mobility.)

Ah, but I don't accept that that attitude (resignation to dead-endedness) is pervasive, or at the very least is nowhere near as pervasive as it once was.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The existence of Debate and the standard of Debate are too very different things. Unless you've lived in a cave during the election campaign I don't think you would have been free of the good old "meaningless soundbite" (Indah I found was surprisingly good at them; if only he didn't remind people of a dodgy country lawyer with a strange accent (at least around here).) That's not debate.

The Sunday Independant - It's arguements are mostly irrelevant and if not, are fantastic constructors of "left"\"Right" Strawmen. The only paper worth a damn is the Irish Times. (Surprised?) Though I admit I need to read more of the Examiner before making a judgement.

Ah, but I would suggest people largely get the level or standard of debate they want to receive and the media would accommodate them. It's as easy to fill up newspaper with commentary on and debate regarding political issues as it is with footballing ones; or celebrity ones. The people, particularly through the newspaper market (but also through the TV market) choose the source of news they feel most comfortable with.

If the market suddenly shifted this week and The Irish Times circulation figures soared while The Irish Sun withered and we saw similar shifts in radio and TV, we'd quickly see the market saturated with debate of a different standard.

(Personally, The Irish Times is my paper of choice. I don't have much time for any of the rest.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well I won't comment on Enright (whose book I haven't read but smacks me as the sort of fashionable literature which is based upon almost pornographic misery, read mainly by smug intellectuals but that's another matter.) or on Jordan; my point relates that in order for democracy - that is, work by the people - to work then there needs to be an active debate involving a vast majority of citizens in their country\county\town\vicinity and show that they have a stake in their own govermental destiny which goes beyond voting for some Seamus Brennan every five years.

And what form should this debate take?

If Popular culture is filled with things not even remotely connected to people's lives then it can't serve as a functioning part of democracy.

But simply by the act of choosing to involve themselves with pop culture, it becomes connected to their lives. And if they freely choose to connect with this culture in whatever form, then what right does anyone have to object to it?

(So choosing between Enright and Jordan is not undemocratic either way; it's when such discourse dominates the media does it become an issue. Read Brave New World or 1984 much?)

Ah, but in 1984 the state determined the news. In the real world, the people/market determines what is news (as I've went through above).

[Јas]

Though I must say I'm somewhat dissapointed by the shortness of your reply. Perhaps I want to be questioned in this manner; even the socratic method must go under the socratic method too. I though must leave with this comment.

You can take it that anything I didn't reply to there I either agree with or only disagree on what are minor points.

[Јas]

Consumerism is though quite a different thing to the Church - for a start it has no obvious figurehead.

I'd argue that it does have figureheads - lots of them, just like the church has a whole series of 'figureheads' (priests, bishops, etc.), so does Consumerism (Hilton; Beckham; Moss; etc. etc.).

One thing that is common throughout Irish History is that there is a tendency to blame the events or power brokers of the past for the problems of the present; usually for legitimate reasons but often completely overboard and never takes into account our own actions

True, but it's almost a natural human reaction to avoid blame (see John Delaney). Nor as a nation are we alone when it comes to pointing elsewhere when a problem arises. (Not that this is the right thing to do, of course.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True. But it certainly exists. As we can see by the amount of people who seem to be relishing the upcoming recession. Twats.

Careful now Gully, you're dangerously close to Bertie Ahern's line here.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I agree; but why is the Market as it is? Unlike the Libertarians you can't see the Market as some sort of independent body free from Society. (see all my above points)

It's unfortunately beyond my meagre talents to explain why the market is as it is - but this is one area where I think the market is very responsive, very quickly to the shifting demands of the public. While I agree that the various elements of the media have their own agendas which they will push - these agendas don't necessarily coalese and indeed often work against one another.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Good Question; and may I say that this should be reached by a Democratic decision.

Ah, but given that currently you feel that society is dominated by 'intellectual laziness', is a Democratic decision (as you define it) even theoretically possible?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well that might depend on how one define "lives". No I don't wish to sound like a snob who wishes the plebs would drop their silly bread and circuses. I'm more curious to why the bread and circuses are so popular in the first place.

That I can't explain. But then I'm not sure anyone adequately can. This might appear a silly question, but why do you want to find out the origins of their popularity?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The idea I was mentioning was how the Media dominated discourse often to pursue agendas; in both books it was promoting one way of life which happened to be version of life put out by the state above "subversive" alternative ideas.

Again, I'd undelrine that the media, of course, is no monolith persuing a singular objective/agenda. The agendas of The Irish Times and the Irish Daily Star for example are more often than not counterpoints - throw in the Financial Times, Heat, Village, FHM and I dare anyone to come up with anything they all agree on, never mind push as an agenda. Similarly re: books and other media. Different messages all.

And what's more there is no obligation, or necessarily any implication that the audience of any particular media will agree or go along with the agenda they are presented with.

If we just accept everything as it is, then it is an intellectual failure on our part. And I'm not just talking about tinkering with how the state governs things; which is what most of the debates on this forum are about in reality.

Ah, but for someone like myself, I must say that speaking in terms of the big picture, I'm reasonably content with the broad approach to running to the country taken by Irish governments - a social democratic model (public provision of healthcare; education; transport; welfare safety net; etc), with good human right protections. Of course, when one considers the detail of governmental approach to the many issues of concern, then I find myself very often in disagreement with the way in which things are done. It is in effect tinkering with the way things are done (a lot of tinkering, but nonetheless...) is how I feel about most matters under government control.

(Whatever you post next; I probably won't be able to reply to it for at least another week. But I look forward to it none the less.)

Are you living in Maynooth these days so? - No access to the interwebs, or no doubt any electronics/black magic wizardry. (No doubt, of course, stuck in a dark room, scribe like, working through the great tomes in candlelight - ah, the good old days... )

[Јas]

New Constituency Commission report released!

Links to the report and maps are available from their website here. (Though at the moment, the report itself is refusing to open up.)



Dublin County:


Dublin City:


Comment when I've had a chance to examine it properly. The standout decision though from the maps is there solution to the Kerry-Limerick problem. General disregard for county boundaries.

Initial inspection seems to be that Louth and Dublin West gain a seat each; Dún Laoghaire and Limerick lose a seat each. IIRC, the contenders for the extra Louth seat are FG and the Greens; in Dublin West - Joe Higgins (Socialist) would be in a strong position to re-enter the Dáil. The loss of a seat in Dún Laoghaire is not good news for FG or the Greens; and the Limerick seat will hugely dent the chances of PD recovery there and threaten a FG or Lab seat.

[Јas]

Some stats...
No change to seat total (166) or constituency total (43).

Number of 5-seaters: 11 (-1)
Number of 4-seaters: 15 (+2)
Number of 3-seaters: 17 (-1)

3 new breaches of county boundaries:
Kerry North-West Limerick
Louth (now includes chunk of Meath)
Tipperary North (now includes south Offaly)

Average Representation: 25,541 people/TD
Least Represented: Carlow-Kilkenny 26,749 (4.73% above average)
Most Represented: Cavan-Monaghan 24,000 (6.03% below average)

[Јas]

Oh joy we get Foxrock added to our lot. I suspect that would favour FG as would the other areas added (though this is just educated guessing really.)

Can someone tell me what's going on in Meath West? (And why oh why do the Commuter belt seats remain as 3 seaters - that just benefits FF.)

The maintenance of two three seaters in Meath and the lack of change in the north of Dublin City would seem to hurt Sinn Féin most.

Btw, the constitution needs to be changed to make seats fit into electorates not population.

OK, heres something I'm not prone to saying... but think of the children!

[Јas]

Oh joy we get Foxrock added to our lot. I suspect that would favour FG as would the other areas added (though this is just educated guessing really.)

Can someone tell me what's going on in Meath West? (And why oh why do the Commuter belt seats remain as 3 seaters - that just benefits FF.)

The maintenance of two three seaters in Meath and the lack of change in the north of Dublin City would seem to hurt Sinn Féin most.

Btw, the constitution needs to be changed to make seats fit into electorates not population.

OK, heres something I'm not prone to saying... but think of the children!

The issue here is really non-nationals (of course if they give the vote to non-nations then I wouldn't complain.)

I see. As I understand it, non-nationals can vote in the locals, EU citizens in the Europeans and Brits in the General.

You're right though about this really screwing SF in North Dublin and.. The socialist party; whose partizans (yes they are real!) are raging as Clare Daly's major base in Dublin North (Ie. Around the Airport area and South Swords) has been moved into Dublin West - Joe Higgins' hunting ground. So any chance of two seats is pretty much screwed. Funny, I never considered the Airport to be in West Dublin. Funny what you learn, eh?

Yep, Daly is a busted flush - she had her chances in the last 2 elections, but failed both times to live up to expectations (well, my expectations anyway).

And you're not the only one who doesn't consider the Airport to be in west Dublin - until yesterday, nobody else did either.

[Јas]

Some more comments on the Dáil constituency changes...

Kerry South:
Now an effective 2 seater (Ceann Comhaire O'Donoghe being automatically elected, assuming he completes the full term). In which case living legend Jackie Healy-Rae (Ind-Kerry S) is done for. It's pretty much inconcievable that he could reach the new quota which will rise from 25% to 33%. I presume he'll retire rather than run again. He has natural successors, at least 2 of his sons are county councillors and one of them, Michael (I think) has groomed himself for the role - the challenge though will be too much.

Kerry North-West Limerick:
Niall Collins's (FF-Limerick West) natural territory, Abbeyfeale, becomes part of the expanded Kerry North having been extricated from Limerick. He faces a very tough decision as to where to try and chase a seat, here or Limerick County.

Louth:
Thomas Byrne (FF-Meath East) also faces a tough call. A large part of his natural base (and I think maybe his own home) has been moved into the new Louth constituency. Ther's now an extra Louth seat, but FF aren't best placed to take it, even with the new territory. Mairead McGuinnes MEP (FG-East) is best placed to take that.

Dublin North
Changes hurt Clare Daly (Socialist) and also Trevor Sargent (Green-Dublin N) - though unless there's a very significant anti-government or anti-Green backlash, Sargent should be fine.

Dublin South & Dún Laoighaire:
The N11 (main road from Dublin towards the Southeast) is the new dividing line between these 2 constituencies as land shifts from DL to Dublin South. A seat also disappears from DL. While FF aren't happy at this transfer, the most obvious casualty is likely to be Ciaran Cuffe (Green-DL).

The change also means that wannabe PD leader Senator Fiona O'Malley really doesn't stand a chance of winning a seat here. O'Malley would naturally look at the PD homeland of Limerick next, however it's exceedingly slim pickings there for her as well. It seems the Gods have conspired against her.

Dublin North Central:
Notably Finian McGrath (Ind-Dublin NC) welcomed the relatively minor changes here which involved the  movement of Edenmore estate into the constituency.

Leitrim:
The area over which the Constituency Commission recieved the most submissions was County Leitrim. The Save Leitrim campaign failed to get the county reunited in a single constituency though, much to their consternation.

It should be noted though that these constituency changes might never see an election. Though they will almost certainly pass into law without amendment, as is the norm, the next Census is due out before the next election and due to judgments handed down earlier this year, it's entirely possible that there will have to be a constituency re-draw before another election. Something the politicans will probably deem undesirable. It's been a while since a Dáil hasn't lasted a full term (the last 3 effectively have) and given the size and nature of the current government, there should be the stability there to last a full term, however the prospect of unknown boundary changes close to a general election might be enough to provoke a slightly earlier election than normal.

[Јas]

Front page story in today's Irish Times:
Irish will need passports to visit Britain from 2009

The Common Travel Area which has existed between Britain and Ireland since independence (and I suppose long before it) is coming to an end. The British wish to set up an e-border system to track terror suspects; criminals; and illegal immigrants.

"The British e-border system is designed to operate by electronically collecting and analysing passenger information in advance of travel to or from the country. This procedure will result in an "alert" if the person travelling is on a watch-list."

"Free movement of people between Ireland and Britain has existed for hundreds of years and the Common Travel Area survived Irish independence in 1922 and the declaration of a Republic in 1949. Throughout the period since independence, even during the second World War and the IRA terrorist campaign, travel has been possible without any identity document between the two states."

The system won't apply to the land border with the North.

[Јas]

Gully, what's the collective noun for members of Sinn Fein? Obviously it's not "Sinners"...

While I prefer "Terrorists" or even "Judean People Frontists" the correct name is actually "Shinners". (As it make it looks Irish, putting a h after the first letter in a word is common in certain gaelic constructions.)

Though commonly used, 'shinners' is pejorative.
There is no official or nuetral term that I'm aware of that applies.

[Јas]

New poll out today by RedC in the Sunday Business Post.
Below are the headline figures of the new poll plus the previous one a month ago and the General Election figures and the last RedC poll published prior to the election.

In the last month, the most significant news stories of political interest here have included the:

• Controversial move to change the rules regarding learner drivers
• The new electoral constituency recommendations
• The never ending saga over the Aer Lingus/Shannon fiasco - including the government being reduced to a single vote majority in a vote on the issue
• Potential split between the Greens and the Taoiseach emerged regarding the building of new incinerators to deal with waste
• Economic reports indicate that we our growth rates are contracting quite quickly
• A brutal murder in Co. Monaghan is blamed on members of the Provisional IRA by the family of the victim - which if proves to be true could seriously destabilise the Northern exectuive

And with all that, this poll tells us that nothing has really changed at all in the public's opinion of the parties.

	23 May	24 May	23 Sept	28 Oct
	RedC	Election	RedC	RedC
Fianna Fáil	38	41.6	40	39
Fine Gael	26	27.3	27	27
Labour	11	10.1	11	10
Green	6	4.7	7	7
Sinn Féin	9	6.9	6	8
PD	3	2.7	3	2
Other	7	6.6	6	7

[Јas]

Back to this again:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In a way that's right but modern 'idols' tend to be a bit more abstract. For example every town in Ireland once had a local priest and a great deal of mythology grew up around the powers of local priests (often in the most rural areas this was combined with alot of old Gaelic mysticism, just showing that the Celtic religions never quite died they just started worshipping crosses instead.) of course there were figure heads like the Pope, The Archbishop, etc but until the invention of mass communication the Pope was directly irrelevant to the lives of Irish people he was just the guy (who no-one knew what he looked like; now that's a sobering thought.) who was in Rome who told the other guys who were Cardinal who told the Archibishops etc what to do. Nowadays I think nearly everyone (at least in my age group; so excluding Vincent Browne) knows what Paris Hilton looks like but actually know her as a person? How do you "know" a person anyway?

Ah, but they don't need (or necessarily want) to 'know' her as a person - they want to know what she's wearing; who's she seeing; etc. The 'real' person is irrelevant - appearance is everything.
 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True; but even more than other nations perhaps because of our location and history we tend to blame solely external sources like the OMG TEH BRITS!!111

I haven't travelled enough to comment on how other nations deal with such things - but I must say while I've met and know people who are remarkably prejudiced against 'the Brits', they're a very distinct minority. I simply don't buy the idea that there is a general and irrational blaming of 'the Brits' regarding relevant Irish problems today.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm sorry if I don't get misery porn? Personally I don't think our culture is a great state is so many of the communitariat seem to be to sexually arouse themselves with the idea of a economic recession. Do we really hate ourselves that much? Or is this just the smugly educated upper middle class folks who become leading journalists (usually writing articles in the Sindo about how awful consumerism is why discussing their latest pair of Manolos.)

I don't think that economic commentators are hoping for a recession or are downtalking the economy just for the sake of it...whether looking at exchequer returns or projected growth figures (particularly in construction) it seems clear (and generally expected) that we are facing an economic slowdown. Just how much the economy will slow down is up in the air - it could lead to a period of stable, if relatively low, growth or it could lead to a very serious economic shock.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No doubt; but that won't happen, why? The idea of liberal Democracy is routed in the notion of an active and educated (often self-educated) citizenship. Now admittely alot of these ideas belong to the age of the Printing press and the Enlightment (Books of course the best medium to express Political ideas, but how many people in Ireland are aliterate - can read but don't?) but I don't believe we can have a Democracy or anything similiar without out. Otherwise we are just giving more power than an already morally bankrupt political class.

Are books the best medium to express political ideas? What's wrong with the internet; TV; newspapers; and film?

On why the public in disinterested...politics is perceived as dull; irrelevant to their day-to-day lives (at least people are relatively content with the performance of government); and something which they can't do anything about anyway - so why bother. (Not that I agree, of course, but I think this is a reflection of a common belief.)

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True; but we are probing deeper than pure economics here (thus "pseudo-science") why is the level of demand like it is.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No or not quite and here is the problem; I realize the contradiction here alas as why that is beyond my meagre talents aswell to truly explain.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Because understanding it is an intregal part of understanding the country in which I was born and raised into?

I'm not sure a country can be understood - or maybe I don't understand what you mean by to understand a country in this context.

It's hard enough to understand another individual nevermind such a large collective of them.

Also I don't believe much is holding Irish society actually together; in this I agree with the most conservative and reactionary Catholics while it's replaced a series of values which are always rooted locally and "in the soil" so the speak most of the new values (of course this is a sweeping statement, like all sociology, In Offaly I met a middle-aged women who criticized the people I was staying with because they did their laundry on a sunday.) are dependant on high levels of disposable income and foreign investment (Both "Visible" and "invisible" like tourism), and even those don't seem to be effective given the level of self-destruction we see in Irish society (Binge Drinking, et al not that binge drinking wasn't a problem "back in the day", That culture was destroyed by it's contradictions.. so will this one.) What will happen once the money goes away? Then what we will have?

Whose pessimistic about the economy now?

To deal with your substantive point though, I don't know what would be left. What have we got now?

While I find many aspects of Irish youth culture to be not to my particular tastes...and binge drinking ranks highly here...I do think that it's part of a fairly normal subversive youth culture which tends to self-destructive activities (despite a belief in their own indestructability). I don't think this is particular to Ireland at all.

If the money was to disappear, we'd adapt - though it may be difficult. It's simply part of the human condition to indulge oneself when possible; just like our ability to adapt to new circumstances.

[Јas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

True. But all Media has an in-built "message" which goes beyond what is obvious. Advertising to take the easy example hidden message is that all life's problems are simply solved and can be resolved in a matter of minutes; no thought, no nuance, no emotion just the robotism of "buying stuff". The Irish Times is full of information which seems to exist outside of space and time - for example can one really understand anything about the Middle-east crisis without at least a knowledge of it's history, all newspapers give the perception that information is a daily occurance which exists outside of human context (ie. There are these things called days and what happens on one day doesn't effect what happens on another.) Okay again this is a generalization, but my point is the media is effecting how we think; which then creates the enviornment to what we think. Of course in reality there is nothing we can do about that if 1 million people quite like owning and watching their TVs.

I think you're being mighty hard on newspapers here. If people want a backstory they can look it up, if The Irish Times was to provide a background piece on Northern Ireland and Iraq and Israel in every edition, there'd be no room left to print any actual news. They have to assume a certain level of knowledge on the part of the reader. The reader can always consult other sources to find this background detail anyway.

And no-body can convey any significant amount of information on ongoing media stories such as those mentioned above without eventually giving away their own stance, this isn't the same as telling the audience how/what to think. And even if they were simply telling people what to think, people are free to reject the message and the messanger.

And there's nothing inherently wrong with TV. Just like books and newpapers and every other form of media, there's good quality content and bad quality content. Is there anything wrong with learning about the ideas of Mill or the history of the Flight of the Earls or whatever from TV instead of from a book. Surely both are subject to similar potential pitfalls?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It's unnatural for an Irish story to end happily. It never does.

Personally there is alot to be grateful for; but I can't help feel there is both a nasty masochistic and anti-intellectual streaks in Irish society (to begin with).

Seriously, you're very pessimistic on this.
(And it's hardly just Irish society that has a dark side.)

[Јas]

FTR, I'm enjoying this fireside chat

Feel free to join in.

[Јas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Oh no doubt about that, I'm showing it's not in the nature of a newspaper to do so. Which is the problem. Are you familiar with "The Medium is the Message" (Which is kind of central to my thesis here)?

(I'm not bothered to write out a whole Thesis here plus I suck at explaining such ideas, I leave this up to wiki whose article is actually fairly good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Medium_is_the_Message. Each Medium has a certain nature, not just Oral or Visual or Typographic but there is certain things one can do with certain mediums that are just not feasible with others (for various reasons) and within certain periods one Medium tends to be more dominate over the other to give an example for where I stole this thesis in the 1850s the Lincoln-Douglas Debates on slavery lasted seven hours consisting of only three speeches (Proposition-Opposition and Prop Rebuttal) by the two politicians, yet it was quite clear from the records that these were widely tended events from across the population. Imagine doing a seven hour debate on Television? Or on the Internet; which is replacing TV as the "dominant" technology? Nah. Attention Span is one thing, meaning that each seperate medium is part of our enviorment and shapes the way we think, etc.)

While all that may be true, I don't think that this offers any truth to the idea than any particular medium is any better than any other.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Well quite alot of things actually an average sized book is likely to contain much more information than a TV show of average length.

Not necessarily. But even if it this is true, that's no guide to quality; nor to which communicates more effectively. I think that the author/producer is more important than the medium.

Plus with Television there is a need to "enforce" imagination by choosing actors, sets, etc while in the book it would all be on the printed page.

I don't grant the premise that in a book all the information is on the page - nor do I feel that the use of 'enforced imagination' on TV/through visual media is necessarily a bad thing.

This may seem irrelevant at first, but given that one is surrounded by mediums all the time and that there is always a tendenancy to preference even very young; (A Child watches how much ads by the time they turn 18? In the hundreds of Thousands iirc) which can influence on how you think. A book and a TV show have such inbuilt assumptions in them which even if you don't accept what is in front of you as "fact" can clearly warp you perception on a historical event.

Example?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In other words, they feel it is abstract from their lives and bears no relation to the "real world" but is rather a media event. Which of course is why so little change is going to be forthcoming, even reluctant acceptance of "reality" will mean "reality" is accepted and so on.

Interesting to note though that voting has gone down since the Economic boom while there are some obvious reasons for this (The Tribunal relevations being one of them) it's quite curious to note that people seemingly had more faith in politicians in the 1980s when Turnout was above 80% and emigration for many may have felt that high.

I disagree with your reasoning on turnout - I think it has more to do with general economic conditions than confidence or otherwise in the political class. At the lowest common denominator of my view here: when times are bad, people turn out for change, when times are good, people don't care.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

A country is an abstract idea which becomes a reality through its laws, its borders, its government, etc. When you grow up one of the first indicators of identity you have in the Modern world is your nationality; I think I learned that I was Irish when I was two, this may seem normal but is only a relatively recent invention dating back to the Enlightment. (And In Ireland's case, the National Revival movement of the 19th Century) So in order to adapt to being "Irish" you sub(?)conciousnessly adopt some notions of Irish which may pick up, of course it's hardly the only personal influence but there are notions of "Irishness" out there and even though we may not be aware of them it effects our identity at some level or another. One can't really be a 'united' nation without some kind of unifying culture, which is why a United Ireland was a true impossibility in the 1920s (or at least a peaceful one) but more likely now, though still a long bit away.

I'd never considered before when I first thought of myself as Irish - frankly I've no idea when this idea first became apparant to me. And on thinking about it now, I have no idea what it means to be Irish.

[Јas]

Of course very few people blame the Brits now, much more fashionable is the Roman Catholic Church or De Valera or whatever. When I mentioned the Brits I merely referring to about 50 years old pre-Troubles, such as the Euphoria of Nationalism which engulfed in Ireland in 1966 50 years after 1916 with all that rhetoric which would be impossible now. But that doesn't mean we have matured, just shifted to a different side of the same cube.

From a small 'n' Scottish nationalist looking in, historically 'anti-British' feeling blinded succesive governments for a good forty years, which is unfortunate as things weren't that bad to begin with. You were not an emerging third world nation with white majority rule, you didn't live under the Raj, you had full representation within the Commons and were treated pretty much the same as any other Home Nation.

I would question whether or not had a famine of similar proportions occured elsewhere on these islands, that it would have been effectively ignored in Westminster.
In no other country of the Union had the vast proportion of the population been severely restricted in its civil and political rights to the same extent.

My papa, my mothers father was of Irish immigrant stock and he would be the first to never make us forget that. But he also fought in WW2 and he could never quite forgive 'The Emergency'; the indifference (verging on the unsympathetic) response by the Irish government during WW2. You were, technically, still a Dominion but unlike distant countries like Canada, Australia, New Zealand who had nothing to gain and everything to loose, rather that 'small nations like Ireland do not and cannot assume a role as defenders of just causes except their own...existence of our own people comes before all other considerations.' What utter sh-t Of course I am aware that there were internal divisions and opposing sides (again) in WW2, two opposing foreign batallions Spanish Civil War and the 40,000 Irish who joined British batallions etc. It's certainly not a charge against the people, but against the government. Thankfully times have moved on and the occasional 'whitewash' over that era in history has been rightfully scrubbed off.

Most of the membership of the then Irish government had actually fought the forces of Britain only a few years previously. They had also fought in a civil war because of the conditions imposed by Britain in the Treaty negotiations. Also, Ireland was also just emerging from a very serious and debilitating tariff war with Britain.

Involving our minute armed forces (some 14,000) would have made absolutely no difference to the war effort and the people of Ireland would have suffered terribly from German bombings. As it was the signing up of some 40,000 citizens to the British army and the significant emigration to bulk up the British work force was much more beneficial to both Ireland and Britain than actually signing up to the Allies ever could have been.

Going to war against Germany, on the side of Britain, because of the invasion of Poland really didn't make sense at the time.

[Јas]

Look at TV news; most of the imagery shown on TV news is when you come down to it, meaningless - only vaguely related to what they are talking about. But it is there because no-one will see two newsreaders just talk to the screen for 25 minutes.

Yes. But so what?

Plus here it should be pointed out the nature of Television tends to need biggish budgets to produce programs, so needs to dominated by financial interests or the Goverment. The same can't be said of book reading; though it's increasingly becoming true of the publishing industry.

Just about all forms of mass media are subject to financial considerations - whether that be with regard to production expenditure or profit expectations - so I don't really grant the premise that TV come off worse than Books for this reason.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I never said it was. (Though it may be if children are over-exposed; but the psychological evidence is inconclusive iirc. I have to ask; why do Children TV-violence so attractive? why are most video games violent? etc. There are reasons for this; something innate in human nature perhaps (that great cop out arguement) or perhaps it is something "programmed" into it.

The TV and video games are simply responding to the aggression that seems to be widely inherent in young males. I don't think they created this aggression, merely they respond and cater to it (not that this is a good thing).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Put a three years old in front of a TV show for children (like Balamory or something) and there's your example.

*laughs* well as someome who spent such formative years infront of Thomas the Tank Engine and whatnot, I might not be able to give an objective opinion on this.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There is some element of that; but it doesn't explain everything - why for example are turnouts for referenda lower than they were nor is this is a particularly historical trend - In most European countries (and America) that I think off the turnout has being going down over the past 20 years almost in a straight line and that's nothing to do with the nation's economic performance.

I suggest the distance between Irish Politicans and the "People" is greater than it was before; though obviously alot greater than in most countries. This is contributing to the lower turnouts, that and the other factors we've mentioned.

I think I'll need to look at the turnout figures of the various referenda and elections before commenting further on this point.

[Јas]

Sorry didn't reply sooner. Been really busy. Anyway...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Shows my comments that some mediums have "innate" natures which leads towards certain things above others. You are not going to see a 7 hour debate on the TV like the Lincoln-Douglas debates, no?

True, but in this day and age, who would want to see a straight 7 hour debate either in person, on TV, or via any particular medium? The media respond to demand - if long political debates topped the ratings I've no doubt we'd see more of them.

In other words the book created new possibilities to criticize the world people were living in and by doing so created a scenario where in order for ideas to be taken seriously one needed to trained in the "book style" of thought) or for that matter, just to read ideas at all (and of course here we go into reading as purely a leisure pursuit) and then after generations we have a new way of thinking, which pretty much continued up until the 19th or 20th Century depending on which media ecologist you talk to.

People were trained to accept books from an early age and how to read them (Which is a much more difficult thing than it seems..) and thus needed to be intregrated into this way of thinking. The same is true now; except the mediums are so much different. Plus most modern (or postmodernist) literature isn't even written in the classical "book Style" with lineal narrative which leads from one thing to another (The phrase "I don't follow" comes to mean "I don't understand".) most of these books don't tell "stories" in the classical sense and this is mainly due to the influence of other media. Or in other words, What a 19th century book version of Family Guy look like?

I follow what you're saying about media modes influencing how we perceive the world around us, and I think it has some validity. But what of it? Particularly in this age when we have more choice than ever over the form of media with which we choose to engage with.

[Јas]

The Irish Times published their first post-election poll in today's edition. As usual tnsMRBI, the pollster. tnsMRBI were by far the most accurate of the polling companies prior to the election. The poll was conducted on Monday and Tuesday, sample 1000, MoE 3%.

Further issues since those mentioned at the last poll:

• Massive pay rise put through for senior civil servants and politicians - Bertie Ahern now earns (IIRC) twice what Gordon Brown does
• House prices fall for the 7th month in a row
• Legal recognition of same-sex couples makes Dáil agenda
• Controversy over 2 solicitors who defrauded clients and banks out of obscene sums of money emerged

I've included the last tnsMRBI poll (which was before the election); the Election result; and the last poll (SBP/RedC, last week) so thee can contrast and compare as thee liketh...

	21 May	24 May	28 Sept	2 Nov
	tnsMRBI	Election	RedC	tnsMRBI
Fianna Fáil	41	41.6	39	33
Fine Gael	27	27.3	27	31
Labour	10	10.1	10	15
Green	6	4.7	7	5
Sinn Féin	9	6.9	8	7
PD	2	2.7	2	2
Other	7	6.6	7	7

Just like 5 years ago, tnsMRBI measure FF taking a big hit post-election. Last time it took just about 4 years for them to recover. FG and Labour register very well. Greens take a slight hit. PDs still showing only vague signs of life.

Noticably, Bertie has taken a big rate to his satisfaction rating. Brian Cowen (Tánaiste, Min. for Finance, FF, Laois-Offaly) rated for the first time rated higher.

[Јas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Been the Opposite. Hah.

The good people at NUIM are clearly now cracking the whips hard enough!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ah, a good question. And an answer I'm too sure of tbh. I think I used this show how to society can be 'controlled' so to speak by conditions which go outside the very nature of politics.

Ah, but I don't really agree that the media controls society. I think that society controls the media moreso than vice versa.

This is a tendency among many people especially polly junkies like us to see society's affairs being mainly dominated by decisions politicians do or don't make; this is probably down to the way history is taught in schools as focused mainly political events. In reality I tend to see Politicans as the servants of the wider society; whose shape is partially dominated by media

I tend to think that the decision making process isn't as linear as media influences society influences politican or some other permutation thereof. I think it's more fluid than that with each element influencing every other one.

(Would Bertie Ahern have been elected to Anything in the 19th Century; after all most of his appeal seems to come from "ordinary North Dublin man - ness" something could not have been communicated back then at all.

Well, in the early 19th century, Berite wouldn't have been elected for reasons of limited franchise extension. And in th latter half, all that would matter would have been getting the right nomination - communicating with the ordinary man wouldn't have mattered a great deal.

The same is actually true of George W Bush or Ronald Reagan in America. Could imagine those three in a serious seven hour debate?)

No, but then I can't imagine anyone in a 7 hour debate. Frankly, i'd consider it a rather inneffective form. If it takes 7 hours to clarify the divergent positions then there has been a breakdown somewhere.