Administration Vs Sovereignty

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
When was the last time a sovereign decision was made in Ireland - or in most other European countries either? It seem that administration has taken the place of sovereignty for most states. We are constantly told that we have to "impress" the markets, or not frighten them anyway. We can organise ourselves to place ourselves better in the eyes of "the markets," but, there is never any question whatsoever about making a sovereign decision to change our way of life completely. To upset the markets would be considered a worse crime and example of sheer insanity than upsetting God was in the middle ages. At lest heresy was thinkable in the middle ages. Upsetting the markets is utterly unthinkable today.

Many discussions are held on RTÉ current affairs. But, never will you see a serious discussion on getting rid of the capitalist system and adopting a better way of doing things. Private property will NEVER be questioned. In short, no sovereign process of decision making will EVER be engaged in - but merely administering the status quo to better facilitate the markets. Sovereignty is, in effect, considered impossible.
 


Sean O'Brian

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
900
I would say that the Eight Amendment to the Irish Constitution was the last truly independent action of this state, going firmly against the dominant Anglo-American liberal cultural orthodoxy that Ireland otherwise follows in every respect. There was also, of course, the 'No to Nice' and 'No Lisbon' referendum results but since these were not accepted as is they don't ultimately count for anything.
 

Bebsaboo

Active member
Joined
Jun 30, 2010
Messages
145
That's begging the question a bit isn't it Cael. I would say that each election is a sovereign decision not only on which party we choose to represent us in running the country but also as a vote of confidence in the system itself.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
29,383
How should a "sovereign decision" be defined then? We have elections every 5 years where pretty much anyone can stand. Those people then vote on decisions of national importance.

The country makes those decisions all the time. What you mean is that you don't like those decisions. The solution's simple. Stand for election next time. Or support someone who's going to stand. SWP, SF whomever. Convince people of the merits of your position. Then if enough people agree with you, you can be in power and make the decisions.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
I would say that the Eight Amendment to the Irish Constitution was the last truly independent action of this state, going firmly against the dominant Anglo-American liberal cultural orthodoxy that Ireland otherwise follows in every respect. There was also, of course, the 'No to Nice' and 'No Lisbon' referendum results but since these were not accepted as is they don't ultimately count for anything.
'ultimately count for anything'

I think you'll end up eating those words.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
That's begging the question a bit isn't it Cael. I would say that each election is a sovereign decision not only on which party we choose to represent us in running the country but also as a vote of confidence in the system itself.
Hardly, a chara. Do you believe that people have a real choice in elections? Exercising sovereignty means having a real choice. When the main parties only offer to administer the already existing status quo, then there is no choice. As for a vote of confidence in the system itself, in most elections, more people choose not to vote than to vote. And, needless to say, we had the disgusting spectacles of the results of the Nice and Lisbon referenda being simply dismissed as the "wrong" answers.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
How should a "sovereign decision" be defined then? We have elections every 5 years where pretty much anyone can stand. Those people then vote on decisions of national importance.

The country makes those decisions all the time. What you mean is that you don't like those decisions. The solution's simple. Stand for election next time. Or support someone who's going to stand. SWP, SF whomever. Convince people of the merits of your position. Then if enough people agree with you, you can be in power and make the decisions.
Sh!t or get off the toilet
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
The country makes those decisions all the time. What you mean is that you don't like those decisions.
Isnt that the point. When the voters dare to vote the "wrong" way, their decision is simply dismissed.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
29,383
Isnt that the point. When the voters dare to vote the "wrong" way, their decision is simply dismissed.
So should we only ever have one vote on anything? So for instance should we let FF remain in power indefinitely? If you dislike the EU so much, you can stand on an anti-EU ticket. You, and your friends can get elected, then put it to the country in a referendum to leave.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
Elections have become a contest for muggers.
 

eoghanacht

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2006
Messages
32,410
So should we only ever have one vote on anything? So for instance should we let FF remain in power indefinitely? If you dislike the EU so much, you can stand on an anti-EU ticket. You, and your friends can get elected, then put it to the country in a referendum to leave.
Can we put it too the country again if say, we got a vote we didn't like?

Thats not to say i disagree with a european union i just don't agree with the path this one is heading on
 
Last edited:

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Of course, another key aspect of the death of sovereignty is the phenomenon of "expert opinion." We are simply told that the "experts" want this, and it would be ridiculous for us ignorant plebs to have a different opinion. Immigration is a good example of this. The "experts" decide that we need mass immigration, and anyone who has a contrary opinion is demonised as a racist or some other kind of primitive. Of course, the fact that these experts have been hired by vested interests is not generaly mentioned...
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
29,383
Can we put it too the country again if say, we got a vote we didn't like?

Thats not to say i disagree with a european union i just don't agree with the path this one is heading in
Sure. You just have to get enough people elected to the Dail to support you.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Sure. You just have to get enough people elected to the Dail to support you.
So, for practical purposes, you cant. The ruling oligarchy could dismiss the results to two referenda, but nobody can reverse that unless they wipe out the power of the oligarchy (and winning a LH election would mean you had already changed the ownership of the corporate media, and stopped the landed oligarchy and their bankers providing donations to their sockpuppet parties, i.e. FF, FG and Labour.)
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Can we put it too the country again if say, we got a vote we didn't like?

Thats not to say i disagree with a european union i just don't agree with the path this one is heading in
The attempted sovereign decisions of the French and the Dutch people were also dismissed, when the EU Constitution was just brought in behind their backs as the Lisbon Treaty.
 

Sean O'Brian

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
900
The attempted sovereign decisions of the French and the Dutch people were also dismissed, when the EU Constitution was just brought in behind their backs as the Lisbon Treaty.
Plus the British Labour Party promised a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty as part of their election pledge.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Just a point that Zizek makes in his new book about formal and actual freedom: formal freedom is the freedom to choose within the co-ordinates of the existing power relations, while actual freedom is the ability to change these power relations themselves.

Its clear that we enjoy only formal freedom, not actual freedom
 

vanla sighs

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
5,089
Just a point that Zizek makes in his new book about formal and actual freedom: formal freedom is the freedom to choose within the co-ordinates of the existing power relations, while actual freedom is the ability to change these power relations themselves.

Its clear that we enjoy only formal freedom, not actual freedom
+1
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Its funny, the the Frontline on RTÉ is doing yet another "debate" on Irish society - and not one signle person dares to even mention the system of social relations - not to mind changing them. As usual, Archbishop Diarmuid Martin has absolutely nothing to say.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top