• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please contact us.




What does Fianna Fail stand for?

Quiet Man

Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2008
Messages
23
There have been a few answers to the question along these lines. An understandable response depending on one's point of view but clearly not what the party actually stands for but rather a description of the behaviour of some of its elected officials and their buddies.
In fact it is clear from the lack of clear responses from FFers that they don't stand for anything much except some superficial notion of 'Irishness' without any details of what it means. It really is time for the ideological meaning of FF (and the other parties) to be debated in public and beyond the narrow realm of Internet message boards. Anyone got any idea on how this can get kick-started?
FFers are simply wasting their time replying on threads like these as the ABFF's dont want to listen to any replies, let alone any that might be reasoned or objective.

There are many excellent posters on this site from many varying backgrounds and allegiances who can show some respect for each others differences and points of views, but sadly the majority of the posters are simply here to attack, insult and score bragging points.

Its been said on other threads, but the more vitriolic the attacks on FF, the more its unsure or wavering supporters will close ranks and will in fact begin to re-galvanise it support base.
 


Toland

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
64,441
Website
www.aggressive-secularist.com
_. P .., .S.
. .:............. ....
....:.................._ ....,
............ .............., .:..
....... . . _:........ :..
_...... . .<........ ....
,...... ....... ..._.
_..... ..:...) .....
:.... ..:.... .....
.... _:..... .....
...... .....U..._.
..... _:..... (
O..... ......
:... ) .......
....._ . ...E:..),
.:.... ).... . _.....
..... ,...... .:....
) ..... ...:.._ .....
....... ..:..... ...+,
. :...... )..:...,. ....
.:....... ..+......., _:...
............?. .............. .....
. .......:............,. :...
. :..............) ...
.. I. .. ,D.
 

Raketemensch

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
3,128
FFers are simply wasting their time replying on threads like these as the ABFF's dont want to listen to any replies, let alone any that might be reasoned or objective.

There are many excellent posters on this site from many varying backgrounds and allegiances who can show some respect for each others differences and points of views, but sadly the majority of the posters are simply here to attack, insult and score bragging points.

Its been said on other threads, but the more vitriolic the attacks on FF, the more its unsure or wavering supporters will close ranks and will in fact begin to re-galvanise it support base.
So their supporters will close ranks and try to re-galvanise support because they have lost support for legitimate reasons? That's not very patriotic is it?
 
Last edited:

staunch ff

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
Messages
148
Interesting question and I trust the motivation in asking it is sincere, will give the benefit of the doubt anyway.
I am 64 years old and joined FF 32 years ago. Though fathers family were very republican politics was very rarely mentioned. I knew father as a child was used to move guns from one place to another and his father had been viciously beaten up by the Black & Tans. Also, fathers first cousin was the first to be killed in action on the day the Civil War started. Despite this I can honestly say there was never a trace of pressure to vote FF in my first 32 years. To me its a personality thing and difficult to explain. As you probably know FF sees itself as a "movement" and not a party in the normal sense. Have never met a FF member with what is called an ideology, its like saying simply that someone has to run the country and we are the people who want to do that cause someone has to do it. The word pragmatism is regulary thrown at FF and like all words with ism it allows freedom of the mind to juggle with those who disagree. FF is also seen as a populist party and there is plenty of truth in that also.

Will fiinish this off in a second post as I am not too good at typing and time runs out if you are slow on this site
 

MPB

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
4,465
Interesting question and I trust the motivation in asking it is sincere, will give the benefit of the doubt anyway.
I am 64 years old and joined FF 32 years ago. Though fathers family were very republican politics was very rarely mentioned. I knew father as a child was used to move guns from one place to another and his father had been viciously beaten up by the Black & Tans. Also, fathers first cousin was the first to be killed in action on the day the Civil War started. Despite this I can honestly say there was never a trace of pressure to vote FF in my first 32 years. To me its a personality thing and difficult to explain. As you probably know FF sees itself as a "movement" and not a party in the normal sense. Have never met a FF member with what is called an ideology, its like saying simply that someone has to run the country and we are the people who want to do that cause someone has to do it. The word pragmatism is regulary thrown at FF and like all words with ism it allows freedom of the mind to juggle with those who disagree. FF is also seen as a populist party and there is plenty of truth in that also.

Will fiinish this off in a second post as I am not too good at typing and time runs out if you are slow on this site
Please don,t as it is becoming boring now. We all have a family history, most young people now, have a history of being screwed by you and your fathers party.
 

staunch ff

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
Messages
148
Please don,t as it is becoming boring now. We all have a family history, most young people now, have a history of being screwed by you and your fathers party.
Is that because the clowns you support dont have the brains to win an election to make the world perfect ?
 

MPB

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 27, 2009
Messages
4,465
Is that because the clowns you support dont have the brains to win an election to make the world perfect ?
Unlike you I do not support clowns. I am my own man. I do not need to be told by my daddy who to vote for.

By the way most stories told to sons by fathers who claim to be war heroes are proven to be false( do not want to burst your bubble by the way).

I heard the same stories.

I decided to read and find out for myself.
 

alan1122

Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2009
Messages
57
For Ffers, Haughy promised the family of Francis Hughes that Bobby Sands death was the first and last and that their son would'nt die. he then went to paris to commit adultry with his mistress and this young Irish man was allowed to die as we know.
He went on to surpass his evilness when he stole the late B.lenihan snr, kidney transplant funds.
and when I think of FF ,I see haughy and his evil grin and its at those moments I re-pledge my self to doing all I can to destroy FF.
 

The Underdog

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2007
Messages
949
Interesting question and I trust the motivation in asking it is sincere, will give the benefit of the doubt anyway.
I am 64 years old and joined FF 32 years ago. Though fathers family were very republican politics was very rarely mentioned. I knew father as a child was used to move guns from one place to another and his father had been viciously beaten up by the Black & Tans. Also, fathers first cousin was the first to be killed in action on the day the Civil War started. Despite this I can honestly say there was never a trace of pressure to vote FF in my first 32 years. To me its a personality thing and difficult to explain. As you probably know FF sees itself as a "movement" and not a party in the normal sense. Have never met a FF member with what is called an ideology, its like saying simply that someone has to run the country and we are the people who want to do that cause someone has to do it. The word pragmatism is regulary thrown at FF and like all words with ism it allows freedom of the mind to juggle with those who disagree. FF is also seen as a populist party and there is plenty of truth in that also.

Will fiinish this off in a second post as I am not too good at typing and time runs out if you are slow on this site
I respect your age, but FF of old are dead and gone. FF have became a twisted self serving filthy corrupt party and done more damage to this country than the Black and Tans and they will go down in history as just as vile and abhorrent to any right thinking person.

FF are the Black and Tans of the 21st Century, and many of us have pledged to do everything in our power to rid this vermin from our country and restore democracy if its the last thing we do.

I am sorry you have been duped all these years, and sold a green bucket of patriotic shamrock sh1t, but if you are the true patriot you claim to be, take off your blinkers and remember . . .

"Pariotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel" Samuel Johnson , April 7, 1775.
 
Last edited:

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
224,089
Do FF supporters think that the very vague reasons for support given so far cancel out the destruction wrought by the political wing of the banks?
Bang on. To read their replies anyone would think they believe they're entitled to their own opinion on that.
 

SideysGhost

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 30, 2009
Messages
17,716
You may as well ask why someone joins the Scientologists.

It's not a rational phenomenon that can be easily dissected and explained. Family background has a lot to do with it, if you were raised in a house that was fairly Republican, where the GAA and the Irish language were respected then in some odd way Fianna Fáil comes with the package as part of "Irishness". All the other parties are somehow suspect, they've a streak of anti-nationalism in them, they can't be trusted to look after the affairs of State.

And so FF might be rogues but they are our rogues and will always protect the independence of the State.

Or so the communal myth goes.

And the communal thing is the other big part of the appeal. FF is "The Party". It's a big family with its own family code of honour, It's just understood without ever being said that party members look out for one another, all in this together, one big happy if slightly chaotic Irish tribe. It's why criticism of FF is so hard to take and why the responses to said criticism often lack coherence and sense - slagging off the party is in a very real sense akin to insulting the man's family....and by extension his sense of Irishness itself. Fianna Fáil, for devotees, is the nation.

For decades most people who just didn't "get" FF and couldn't understand why so many people were so willing to blind eye to the incompetence and financial chicanery and general uselessness of FF in power - well, most of them were people whose sense of nationalism was fairly weak anyway. They didn't "get" the whole nationalism thing in the first place, and so they didn't "get" Fianna Fáil and its supporters.

Over the last few years though more and more people from that background have woken up to the criminality and incompetence at the top and joined the ABFF camp. This is where the critical danger for FF lies. If the linkage in the tribal mind between "Fianna Fáil" and "Irishness" is broken, then the party is finished and will rapidly disintegrate.
 

staunch ff

Active member
Joined
Nov 12, 2009
Messages
148
Cannot master the IT on this site. Wrote a long piece but silly IT said I was not logged in and it disappeared. Whats wrong with first a slow typist and secondly a person writing something he/she takes seriously needing time. Other boards over the years you could spend a day on something and still post it. Also, is it possible for the owners of these boards to zoom in and watch what you are typing ?
 

edg

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 14, 2009
Messages
13,484
Cannot master the IT on this site. Wrote a long piece but silly IT said I was not logged in and it disappeared. Whats wrong with first a slow typist and secondly a person writing something he/she takes seriously needing time. Other boards over the years you could spend a day on something and still post it. Also, is it possible for the owners of these boards to zoom in and watch what you are typing ?
If you click the "stay logged in" button when you log in you wont get kicked out. You will only be loged out when you click the log out button yourself.
 

Fun with Irish

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
2,609
Fianna Fáil is a classic populist party in the sense that its only policy normally is to follow the crowd, and do what it thinks the public wants, not because it is right but because it is popular.

It has however potentially fatally compromised that appeal by in the 1990s and 2000s becoming a distinctly sectional party, becoming the political wing of builders, bankers and developers. That worked when either the developers had mass support or tolerance, coupled with a form of communal pride in the Celtic Tiger, or when developers' interests were at least marginally similar to popular interest, ie everyone wanted property, wanted to own houses, etc. In the current economic crisis that parallel interest has shattered, leaving bankers, builders and developers' interests conflicting with the perceived interest of voters. Fianna Fáil under Cowen has not been able to dump its cosy cartel with those groups, generating mass public antagonism. The public aren't simply angry with increases taxes, etc. Public opinion can wear harsh measures, but only if they are convinced that those taking the decisions are not protecting those whose interests are contrary to the perceived public interest. People however perceive that FF is still protecting its 'friends' and is willing to shaft ordinary people to protect the interests of its funders.

Lipset and Rokkan, and others, have written how when a political party system emerges (through what is know as 'mass political mobilisation') it is effectively locked in place, which is why parties in many countries tend to be cross-generational and cross-era, reinventing themselves as different public issues arise. FF was always a classic reinvention party (the party that was anti-the treaty worked the treaty; the party that was anti-industrialisation and pro-rural became the party of industrialisation and urban society. The party that was fanatically republican and anti- the Anglo-Irish Agreement became the party of the AIA and the Belfast Agreement, the party that was protectionist became non-protectionist, etc.

However under Lipset and Rokkan, and others there is one thing that sweeps a party into the electoral bin - a failure to evolve and to control its own message. That happened to the Liberals in the UK in the 1920s, happened to the Radicals in France in the 1950s, happened to the Christian Democrats in Italy and the Conservatives in Canada in the 1990s, etc. There is a possibility that such a catastrophic failure may be facing FF this time, for a number of reasons:

1. It had knack of losing power at the right time, being able to oppose cuts on the basis of populism and then return to power when public opinion was ready for cuts. Its Waterloo may ironically have been in 2002 this time. FG lost so many seats it needed to climb not one but two political everests to get into power in 2007. While Kenny achieved the highest comparative seat increase in political history, beating the records of de Valera, Lynch, O'Malley and Spring, it still was not enough, by a tiny amount, to deliver government. So FF find themselves in government during a massive recession and so find the conflict between their populism and their links with bankers, developers and monied supporters.

2. They have an indecisive leader who avoids taking leadership stances in the way other international leaders have done - ie, no message to the nation, no openness, a constant feeling of drift and indecision.

3. The fact that the PDs plus McCreevy dragged FF off its 'follow the people' appeal and into right wing economics, a division exposed in the collapse of the Celtic Tiger when a series of fatal mistakes, most notably overheating the economy to boost party supporting builders and developers, etc.

4. A disintergrating local organisation. A party once a by-word for local on-the-ground has through complaicency linked to Celtic Tiger arrogance ('we are brilliant. We led the country into the boom. We know what we are doing. Critics should commit suicide' etc).

5. Radical change within its main rival Fine Gael, who under Kenny went from being a niche party (large farmers and the wealthy) to being the dominant party among young people, has a massive working class support base (!!!) and re-vitalised organisation, helping to grow into the 30s and remain there, whereas over the previous 30 years FF went from being a party in the 40s to hit the 30s (two elections saw it at 39%, in 1992 and 1997), followed by freefall through the thirties and in polls down to the mid 20s and below. (Political scientists used to say FF could not go below 37%, then 34%, then pollsters said FF had 30% minimum guaranteed. On current poll numbers even hitting 30% is now unlikely!)

So arguably FF nows fit the pattern for one of those catastrophic meltdowns so rare in politics worldwide and which only happen in very exceptional circumstances.

I had always presumed FF was a cert to be the dominant party in Ireland. For the first time looking at what happened in places like Italy, Canada, France etc I am beginning to wonder whether FF's position as the dominant player is in doubt, with Cowen in effect as the John Dillon of the party, taking over a party far less strong in reality than perceived, and drifting from dominance to marginalisation. It is worth noting that FF achieved dominance in the period 1930-36, when then depression so damaged the previously main party, Cumann na nGaedhael, that it allowed the second-placed party, Fianna Fáil, to overtake it and maintain that dominance, with Cumann na nGaedhael, and later Fine Gael, going into longterm decline, producing a one-time party of government that by 1948 was down into the teens in support. It is ironic that FF are in such severe trouble in the biggest economic crisis since the 1930s. (Curiously, every big economic collapse produced a realignment. The 1817-1830 crash produced the O'Connellite movement. The late 1870s-1880s banking crash produced the Home Rule party and led Parnell to dominance within it following William Shaw's desposition in 1880 - Shaw ended up being made Bankcrupt when his Munster Bank collapsed some years later - and the realignment in Free State politics in the 1932 election following the impact in Ireland of the depression.

Statistically Ireland is only 3% off a full depression, and the budget is likely to depress the economy by greater than 3%. So the biggest collapse since the 1930s could produce another political realignment.
 

Fun with Irish

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Messages
2,609
Fianna Fáil is a classic populist party in the sense that its only policy normally is to follow the crowd, and do what it thinks the public wants, not because it is right but because it is popular.

It has however potentially fatally compromised that appeal by in the 1990s and 2000s becoming a distinctly sectional party, becoming the political wing of builders, bankers and developers. That worked when either the developers had mass support or tolerance, coupled with a form of communal pride in the Celtic Tiger, or when developers' interests were at least marginally similar to popular interest, ie everyone wanted property, wanted to own houses, etc. In the current economic crisis that parallel interest has shattered, leaving bankers, builders and developers' interests conflicting with the perceived interest of voters. Fianna Fáil under Cowen has not been able to dump its cosy cartel with those groups, generating mass public antagonism. The public aren't simply angry with increases taxes, etc. Public opinion can wear harsh measures, but only if they are convinced that those taking the decisions are not protecting those whose interests are contrary to the perceived public interest. People however perceive that FF is still protecting its 'friends' and is willing to shaft ordinary people to protect the interests of its funders.

Lipset and Rokkan, and others, have written how when a political party system emerges (through what is know as 'mass political mobilisation') it is effectively locked in place, which is why parties in many countries tend to be cross-generational and cross-era, reinventing themselves as different public issues arise. FF was always a classic reinvention party (the party that was anti-the treaty worked the treaty; the party that was anti-industrialisation and pro-rural became the party of industrialisation and urban society. The party that was fanatically republican and anti- the Anglo-Irish Agreement became the party of the AIA and the Belfast Agreement, the party that was protectionist became non-protectionist, etc.

However under Lipset and Rokkan, and others there is one thing that sweeps a party into the electoral bin - a failure to evolve and to control its own message. That happened to the Liberals in the UK in the 1920s, happened to the Radicals in France in the 1950s, happened to the Christian Democrats in Italy and the Conservatives in Canada in the 1990s, etc. There is a possibility that such a catastrophic failure may be facing FF this time, for a number of reasons:

1. It had knack of losing power at the right time, being able to oppose cuts on the basis of populism and then return to power when public opinion was ready for cuts. Its Waterloo may ironically have been in 2002 this time. FG lost so many seats it needed to climb not one but two political everests to get into power in 2007. While Kenny achieved the highest comparative seat increase in political history, beating the records of de Valera, Lynch, O'Malley and Spring, it still was not enough, by a tiny amount, to deliver government. So FF find themselves in government during a massive recession and so find the conflict between their populism and their links with bankers, developers and monied supporters.

2. They have an indecisive leader who avoids taking leadership stances in the way other international leaders have done - ie, no message to the nation, no openness, a constant feeling of drift and indecision.

3. The fact that the PDs plus McCreevy dragged FF off its 'follow the people' appeal and into right wing economics, a division exposed in the collapse of the Celtic Tiger when a series of fatal mistakes, most notably overheating the economy to boost party supporting builders and developers, etc.

4. A disintergrating local organisation. A party once a by-word for local on-the-ground has through complaicency linked to Celtic Tiger arrogance ('we are brilliant. We led the country into the boom. We know what we are doing. Critics should commit suicide' etc).

5. Radical change within its main rival Fine Gael, who under Kenny went from being a niche party (large farmers and the wealthy) to being the dominant party among young people, has a massive working class support base (!!!) and re-vitalised organisation, helping to grow into the 30s and remain there, whereas over the previous 30 years FF went from being a party in the 40s to hit the 30s (two elections saw it at 39%, in 1992 and 1997), followed by freefall through the thirties and in polls down to the mid 20s and below. (Political scientists used to say FF could not go below 37%, then 34%, then pollsters said FF had 30% minimum guaranteed. On current poll numbers even hitting 30% is now unlikely!)

So arguably FF nows fit the pattern for one of those catastrophic meltdowns so rare in politics worldwide and which only happen in very exceptional circumstances.

I had always presumed FF was a cert to be the dominant party in Ireland. For the first time looking at what happened in places like Italy, Canada, France etc I am beginning to wonder whether FF's position as the dominant player is in doubt, with Cowen in effect as the John Dillon of the party, taking over a party far less strong in reality than perceived, and drifting from dominance to marginalisation. It is worth noting that FF achieved dominance in the period 1930-36, when then depression so damaged the previously main party, Cumann na nGaedhael, that it allowed the second-placed party, Fianna Fáil, to overtake it and maintain that dominance, with Cumann na nGaedhael, and later Fine Gael, going into longterm decline, producing a one-time party of government that by 1948 was down into the teens in support. It is ironic that FF are in such severe trouble in the biggest economic crisis since the 1930s. (Curiously, every big economic collapse produced a realignment. The 1817-1830 crash produced the O'Connellite movement. The late 1870s-1880s banking crash produced the Home Rule party and led Parnell to dominance within it following William Shaw's desposition in 1880 - Shaw ended up being made Bankcrupt when his Munster Bank collapsed some years later - and the realignment in Free State politics in the 1932 election following the impact in Ireland of the depression.

Statistically Ireland is only 3% off a full depression, and the budget is likely to depress the economy by greater than 3%. So the biggest collapse since the 1930s could produce another political realignment.
 

I Hate Trade Unions

New member
Joined
Oct 27, 2009
Messages
4
Fianna Fail = Greedy Selfish F**kers
You think??? Social welfare has increased EXPONENTIALY under Fianna fail please critise them on a real issue greedy selfish f**ckers? in what way please explain what does fianna fail do to make them greedy selfish or f**ckers? please learn how to play nice and not jump on the bandwagon like the miserable immature childish nonsense that you post
 

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top