What he said.

You think democratic politics is so utterly pointless and pettily corrupt and ignorant and self-serving that a different system couldn't be any worse until you spend time in a non-democratic country and witness the utter contempt with which the ruling elite treat their citizens and the absolute complacency with which the most basic human rights are ignored. I find it odd that the people who tend to be most dismissive of parliamentary democracy are those who are crossest that their particular viewpoint, normally a minority one, is not adequately listened to or reflected by politicians and/or MSM. I think it would probably be a salutary lesson to spend a year or two espousing a minority political/social position in a country without democratic politics, the rule of law, freedom of expression and a functioning and non-corrupt judicial system to see how that works out.

Not true. If you voted Thatcher in 1979 or FDR in 1932 you got major structural change. Likewise, if you voted Labour in 1997 you got major changes (devolution, BoE independence). The key ingredient is charismatic leadership, not policy options. Our democratic system has so far produced really poor leadership alternatives, given the depth of our crisis and the depth of the adjustment to come.

I think a NO vote here in the upcoming referendum would actually force a lot of structural adjustment. It would expose the BS at the heart of the conformist side of Irish politics. O'Cuiv is right strategically to take the stance he is taking - not sure he will be the winner, but there is no percentage in supporting the status quo. Once the electorate realise the depth of austerity still to come, only the opposition will be winners.

So as expected no government
Elections Part 2 to follow


While all of this is going on, Greece has to come up with billions in Cuts before the end of June. How can this happen?
If it doesnt come up with the cuts will it be out of the Euro by the end of the year?

Indeed. Hence my use of the phrase, 'nearly always the case'. I do wonder what would happen should we get a 'no' vote this time - but I'd rather voluntary, planned reform along the lines of a Second Republic, new constitution, electoral list system and so forth, not a rush to the extremes along Greek lines which is not going to end at all well.

no one is proposing a voluntary planned reform. The looting continues unabated.

Plenty of people are - but not those in power, oddly enough.

Globalisation put an end to political parties offering major structural change. National governmental power has been severly weakened in terms of domestic economic and social policy. Thats largely why the left have been found wanting; the discourse has become about "capital flight" and the "pro business policies" lest that other guy get a greater share of that footloose global investment.

While the above may be quite valid and even praiseworthy in some respects (as are the opinions offered by both Yogan and Barney above), it is not without flaws in its logic.

Firstly, it is based on the assumption that different political entities are basically entirely separate from one another and exist in a vaccuum of their own. In this regard it ignores the interlinked nature of the global economy, which is itself a trans-national entity which traverses borders, and of which we are all a part. Therefore, while we are obviously in a position as individuals, possessed of our own views and opinions, free to formulate viewpoints and opinions with regard to how particular societies function and make judgements based on same with regard to whether we may view one as being superior or otherwise to another, the reality is that we, as westerners, benefit in economic terms from the fact that others live within economically and often politically repressive environments...essentially that they do not enjoy the benefits that we do. So, it could actually be argued that western democracy itself, seemingly based as it has been during the course of my lifetime on the ability of its citizens to play the role of mass consumers, is itself based on its own ability to provide said consumers (read voters) with cheap bling and tat produced in poorer and more repressive regions of the globe such as those referred to by you above.

Secondly, the point here is not that anyone is cheerleading the demise of democracy just yet. It is however the case that some people are seemingly becoming disillusioned with the system as it stands for the simple reason that it appears to have very little power to act in any meaningful way to address the current problems. As Yogan has pointed out this is what happened pre-WW2 even down to the citing of international bankers/financiers and minority or marginalised societal groups as being the true problems. Like I said, it all seems so predictable...and it doesnt matter whether we deem it to be 'better' or 'worse'. Its happening and will continue to happen so long as events continue along their current (predictable) course.

I personally think that democracy as we knew it is dead, in Ireland, Greece and Italy anyway. We are all, different forms of Technocratic government either directly as in Greece and Italy or behind the scenes in our case through the ECB/IMF. One of the basic functions of the state is that it raises revenue and decides where that money goes. We can neither raise enough money nor are we free to decide where that money goes.

If we are to regain our democracy then we will need to regain our economic freedom and I fear the longer we leave it off the harder it'll become to do so.

I think you're wrong. I think our democracy is functioning as it always has. Certainly, some of the candidates I voted for in the last election got elected, and some didn't, same as all the previous elections. You can't say democracy isn't working just because we choose to pay our debts. No debtor is free to decide where their money goes. We spent -- and continue with every passing month to spend -- other people's money. Money that we didn't work for and have no earthly right to. Why on earth should we get to decide where our tax revenue goes in that situation? Would you expect to be able to borrow off your neighbour to pay your bills every month and then, come pay day, spend your pay cheque on whatever you like? Certainly we can raise enough money -- we just have to spend a lot less of it. It's a very simple equation.

Couldnt be clearer but i have no idea what he means by rehabilitation
Maybe lost in Translation

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2012/05 ... dcontent=1

I agree with you in that it's functioning as it always has but in the past when we messed up our fate was still in our hands. I've not a great knowledge of Irish financial history but the country has been in worse states than it is now and we've not had technocratic government. Now through a gradual slide of giving more power to Europe we have lost the power to make the maneuvers we would've before to extricate ourselves.

When have we been in a worse financial position?
What powers of maneuvering have we lost?

I'm open to correction but the 30s/50's and 80's were probably worse than now.

We've apparently lost the ability to allow a bank to go bust. It may be argued that we've lost to willingness to allow one go bust, but I wonder where that unwillingness comes from.
We've also lost our own currency. Whether you agree with QE or not it is a tool, one that we've used in the past.

What nonsense. Hard working population currently around 3 million. GDP generated around 250 billion euro. So that's around Euro 85,000 per working person created. Public expenditure for 2012 is budgeted at €55.8 billion. So where does the other 195B go created by the blood and sweat and intellectual effort (admittedly organised to a large extent by US organisational know-how) of the Irish work-force? Perhaps those so overly concerned with the 'deficit' would do better to focus on the 195B side of the equation than their continued whittling away at the 55B side. ie. Look to their own coffers and to the coffers of their own paymasters.