So...Ok then...How do we talk about it? (Irish Presidential Election Result)

I posted the thread on Sat morning and have been locked out of Boards since so apologies for responding in one go like this.

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

So Peter Casey wants to criticise Irish government and some local authority policy towards the Travelling Community - fine. Let him at it. I wouldnt vote for him because of that and Id hate to think we are creating a society that WILL vote for someone just because of that, because we are too busy tilting at windmills to actually engage in debate

I largely agree with what you said (I do believe he was dog whistling as the topic was not relevant for this election).
I do fear that we have started to create the society you speak about. To me, it is astounding that we are going down the path of the US and the UK in listening to populist, nationalist claims which are very short term focused.

Godot. wrote: »

Casey topping the poll in Rathkeale and Askeaton, unsurprisingly - places with high population densities of travellers. But shure Casey is a racist, the D4 heads that have never interacted with a traveller in their lives said so :rolleyes:

To be fair, Rathkeale and Askeaton are at the extreme end of the scale in terms of densities of travellers but you’re right, it still is the case that PC’s statements affected the polls.

salmocab wrote: »

I’m not so sure that the Casey vote is much to do with the right, it’s a lazy comparison made by poor journalism. I’d be quite liberal leaning as would a lot of my friends and there was a lot of sympathy for his views. I wouldn’t think it actually translated into votes within my circle of friends for him.
It’s quite possible to be liberal and dislike people in society living off your taxes, I’m not just talking about some travelers but plenty of settled people too. Liberal doesn’t mean that you support a welfare state. It’s a phrase that’s been stolen by far right groups and turned into something it isn’t.

This is part of what brought me to posting the thread. Those that don’t see it from my view “are lazy and deliver poor work”, it’s the same on both sides and I'm wondering how do we get away from it outside of populist claims (again, from both sides) which may result in someone being elected.

tretorn wrote: »

All this media talk sbout Caseys vote being a kickback against the PC liberal agenda is fudging the issue.
Its clear the biggest votes Casey got is from rural Iteland and its this sector of the community that bear the brunt of traveller criminal behaviour. There is nothing co incidental about the voting patterns and we dont need deep intellectual debates. We need enforcing of the existing laws and some effective consequences for travellers who break those laws.

Your first point in bold I think is false given that so many who supported Casey are claiming it. Colm Parkinson said so explicitly in one of the Top posts on Twitter immediately after the results were announced.

Your second point I agree with completely. If this was done, and travellers were challenged or appeared in court a lot (which they already do it seems) then Pavee point would claim that they were being unfairly targeted while others would say that they still weren’t being targeted enough.
As in the post I referenced in my OP I’d like to see facts and figures prepared and presented by both sides in an open, transparent and impartial environment so both sides could challenge and defend specific points simultaneously.

Hurrache wrote: »

It's an astounding level of ignorance to the workings and history of our society and when government does change, but societal Issues don't, it'll lead to further disillusionment of those without a proper understanding.

Agree completely with this and think that such blasé attitudes to the complexity of societal governance and just what exactly good governance is has led to Trump and Brexit in two recent and extreme cases.
How do we increase understanding and discuss and accept hard facts (on all sides) where we don’t regress in to a place where the person who shouts loudest gets control.

Hurrache wrote: »

Martin said yesterday there's no place for him in FF. Of course he doesn't seem to be on top of what's happening in his party these days.

Slightly off topic but, I actually see MM as a party leader though in opposition is still trying to put the needs of the country first. I personally, am pleased that he seems to recognize that a GE while Brexit is being negotiated and implemented is not in the countries interest and so he is not agitating for one. He gets stick from all sides for his approach but I prefer this than squabbling and bickering without progress or action such as what we see from Labour in the UK at the moment (and democrats in the US for that matter but that’s a whole other basket of crazy).

P_1 wrote: »

Sorry what use is an ECDL to someone trying to get an office job. Everyone knows how to save files and navigate windows explorer. Send them on excel courses. That's how you get work.

Everyone doesn’t know. You’d actually be surprised at the amount of people who have even gotten to level 6 qualification with a poor understanding of basic office PC skills. And, many are quite embarrassed by it as they feel they should know this but while they have spent years on PC’s its been the same limited tasks day after day.

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Gutter politics has made its way to our shores, be prepared for weird stuff!

This is the nub of the issue in my mind. Those that are happy Peter Casey did so well think this past few days has been some sort of an awakening, they feel that they have been ignored and others who aren’t willing to help themselves, or aren’t Irish are being accommodated in ways which are not available to them and they must pay for it through the taxes they do pay. The opposing side feel that what we are doing is asking everyone to support those that need it most so that they too can benefit from and contribute to society. Both sides think the other is mad to think the way they do and so we end up with extreme views gaining an audience.

I feel part of the reason that Peter Casey was so successful was because of his comments and the fact that the story of Margaret Cash got such coverage over the last few months. Many see her as being granted equivalent sums to very well paid individuals while not working, being charged with shop lifting, having multiple children without a consistent earned revenue while claiming the government owed her and were annoyed. That annoyance turned to outright anger when the narrative on radio and tv shows and in newspapers was that people should be ashamed to question her role or responsibility for her circumstances.

My feeling is that there are travellers who want to work, who have tried to get a job, who are poorly educated and wish none of this was the case but their circumstance and the environment they grew up in has brought them to this. I think these should be supported and I do know that there will always be some who try to get something for absolutely nothing (as true for those at the top of society as the bottom) but we can’t tar them all the same way. Personally, I would pay towards one Margaret Cash if it meant another family was supported and availed of the opportunity to get educated employment and thus contribute to society in their turn.

But, how do we learn the facts without the single sided editorials and opinion pieces which make wide sweeping black and white statements ignoring the fact that it is mostly areas of grey which actually exists?

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/casey-phenomenon-no-harbinger-of-new-form-of-populist-politics-1.3678720?mode=sample&auth-failed=1&pw-origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.irishtimes.com%2Fopinion%2Fcasey-phenomenon-no-harbinger-of-new-form-of-populist-politics-1.3678720
Indeed. This article positions the Casey surge in an established pattern of voters 'sticking it to the man' in second-order elections. But things always revert to the status quo afterwards.

I'm not sure this is the case when looking at Trump/Brexit. If I was betting today, I'd say Republicans will hold at least the senate and that Trump is even money to be reelected. Brexit is gone too far to not happen.

Sam Russell wrote: »

It needs action from both sides, and Pavee Point should be leading this by advocating for travellers to improve their behaviour and those travellers that disagree with those travellers that misbehave to mend their ways.

I'm inclined to agree. As I said previously, if both sides think that they are in the right position, why aren't they willing for their claims to be challenged and explored so the evidence will show them to be correct.

Both sides should welcome the opportunity to defend their position.
I can understand travellers feeling that they are being targeted unfairly but now that Casey has raised the discussion to a national/public level, lets see what the stats are.
Education rates, employment rates, mortgage holding rates, etc
And then explore the root causes for the differences.

It's very simplistic to say that travellers don't complete the leaving cert to the same level as most other communities. Is it because they don't have the opportunity or are not supported when attending school and feel ostracised or because they simply choose not to attend?