Slugger O'Toole

This user has not yet written a description

Latest posts from Kensei (see all)

Kensei has posted 47 times (0 in the last month).

Latest comments from Kensei (see all)

Kensei has commented 337 times (5 in the last month).

1. Comment on “Republicans should remember that the third colour in the Irish flag is Orange…”
   on 21 May 2013 at 9:24 am

   Mick

   Sorry, no, I’m not letting you elide from “Who defines culture and what gets banned” to “”We have an absence of politics”, free, in a single bound. For politics to work there has to be some agreement on what the problems are. Banning parades has never been a mainstream Nationalist position. We are talking about a reroute of a limited number of parades. That the OO really, really doesn’t like it, or it is a shake up of a previous status quo, or Nationalism might be using the issue as a tactical or strategic maneuver doesn’t really matter. What is proposed is actually fairly limited.

   Secondly, political parties ascribe a single character to groups all the time. The BNP is an almost tautological example. The Tories were treating UKIP that way until it blew up in their face. The “Better Together” campaign routinely gets pretty ugly about “Nats” or worse “CyberNats”. They do it if they think there is some sort of tactical advantage in it, or if they can get away with it without cost. Often they have one part of the party do it while another plays nice.

   Republicans do need to find a better way to talk to and about loyalism. But a lot of the stuff that happens needs condemned and is actually designed to be proactive. So it is a difficult tightrope. But no, we aren’t particularly special, and the demand that Republicans or anyone else here be better politicians than everywhere else is a call doomed to fail.

   Go to comment

2. Comment on “Republicans should remember that the third colour in the Irish flag is Orange…”
   on 20 May 2013 at 4:05 pm

   Mick

   You are doing a classic straw man. Could you point to the Nationalists and Republicans arguing for an outright ban on orange parades?

   It is rare (though not unknown) in a democracy to see an outright ban on a parade or demonstration that would completely violate freedom of assembly. What is not most definitely not rare is to see restrictions placed on demonstrations or assemblies that limit the demonstration on the axis of time, geography or cost. Whether or not you believe in a “Nationalist” or “Loyalist” area, the right of local residents to protest at construction to activities near where they live is also very well established, particularly in the UK. Try organising a concert somewhere the residents are opposed and see how you get on.

   What is being asked is for an amended route, either in geography, time or both. Nationalism could get really pissy about having to pay for parades and could probably do a lot of damage via blocking funding but by and large don’t.

   The OO could also modify some of its positions in an attempt to nullify the allegeric reaction it engenders within Nationalism. It could very loudly proclaim a new oath (even if they don’t have one now!) that addressed concerns. they could put in place disciplinary measures for those that, I dunno, provoke confrontation at Churches and apply them – even if it is “the bands” they can refuse to parade with them. They can stigmatism them. That works wonders. They could reach out to the communities and try to do some charity and cross community work. tHEY DON’T

   This is not about “culture”. It is not about “freedom of expression”. Please do not continue propaganda that suggests it is.

   Go to comment

3. Comment on Death of CSI: If we can’t have a strategy what about asking better questions?
   on 12 May 2013 at 11:46 am

   Mick

   You are on very shaky ground if you talk aboyt population movements without reference to house prices. Even now, ask yourself what you get in West and North Belfast vs somewhere further out. And that goes literally double during the boom. This just as much of a thing in the 80s and 90s. Houses that were just abiut inside my parents income then are astronomically far outside it now.

   Plus in the case of North Belfast, there isn’t enough suitable housing for people to be near their ma even if they wanted to. Gettig peace walls down probably helps in that regard.

   Go to comment

4. Comment on Micheál Martin: Legacy of 1916 is to build rather than to divide the Irish nation…
   on 23 April 2013 at 1:23 pm

   I’m not sure people lacked plans going in. It’s just few of them survive contact with opponents. I imagine that both the SDLP and SF thought they’d be able to leverage some concessions out of Unionism, and both have discovered they can’t, because the DUP seems to derive a fair whack of its political ID in denying Nationalism anything. I mean – the flag protests came as a shock to anyone sane, when you consider what was actually agreed.

   There is a certain amount of intellectual exhaustion. The basic idea of getting into power North and South and doing something is sound, but it stops there. How to connect the dots? Make coherent moves both sides. It’s a tough one.

   As is also the ability to reach beyond traditional voters in a situation that remain very defensive. It is easy to pontificate about taking bold risks to move things on, but even easy to cock that up and lose your core support. That are difficult strategic question as well, about how and to what extent you look to expand but there has been no real thinking.

   Anyone can criticism anything: we live in a democracy. But the big leaps come from proposing alternative directions. Maybe this is only the first stage and Martin will come up with solutions. But tactically the criticisms serve a dual purpose of hitting both the government and SF at the same time. There is little evidence of actual strategic thought on the North, as yet, so be wary of overegging the pudding.

   Go to comment

5. Comment on Micheál Martin: Legacy of 1916 is to build rather than to divide the Irish nation…
   on 22 April 2013 at 11:06 pm

   1. There is a certain amount of mom and apple pie here. Pointing out the influence of Protestantism within Republicanism is a neat way of appealing the base sneaking suspicion that we are somehow better than t’other, unless that message is transmitted to non nationalist communities and come packaged with someway of trying to make up for the loss.

   2. The 1916 Proclamation is a rather enlightened document, particularly considering the period in which it was written and some of the more unpleasant ideas in the ethe ri that period, but again meat and drink stuff. The suggestion that physical force republicans would have been less happy with physical force under present is circumstances is a stretch. Pearse was not particularly compromising, no. It is a stretch and revisionist for all the right reasons, but still speaks of an Ireland uncomfortable to face its own logic head on.

   3.To run through his criticisms:

   A. The British and Irish Governments have left a dangerous vacuum.

   At some point this place needs to govern itself, and the move away from constant peace processing has to happen at some point. That was certainly worth a punt in the last few years; perhaps it is too soon and it hasn’t worked out and we need to switch back, but I’m not sure I agree with him here.

   B. SF and DUP are politicing not governing

   There is some merit on this, but that argument ignores the difficulties of a forced coalition, and skips into a dangerous sort of pox on both there houses that fails to properly analyse the situation. I’ve not followed as closely as I once did but my sense is the DUP are potentially a little more effective but also equally more likely to block anything SF wants.
   It also ignores that if the SF and DUP are behaving in this manner, it is because it is what there electorate wants or is happy to tolerate. For all the talk and citing of various polls, there is no palable sense of a strong desire for change, and neither the UUP or SDLP have been able to manufacture it.
   Additionally, there is a lot of change coming form Westminster, and it is much harder to push through this sort of change in a shrinking rather than a growing environment.

   C. SF are a bit naughty protesting

   Sorry, but whatever the theoritical merits this is essentially naked dog whistle stuff. SF have a hard time managing their communities and keep them on board, and if they didn’t protest the dissidents would, and pull some people with them. FF themselves were a slightly constitutional party for a long while. I’ll take an imperfect in theory party that holds people over a perfectly moral one that doesn’t, even time.

   But the major problem is this. RFK said:
   “I do not run for the Presidency merely to oppose any man but to propose new policies”. There is a lot of criticism, but no concrete new policy. Not just in the “They won’t run here” sense, which is indeed annoying, but in the “What we’d do differently as an Irish Government” sense. What does a more proactive policy mean? What would they do if the British didn’t care? There is no meat.

   Go to comment

6. Comment on Margaret Thatcher: An Ireland ALMOST reconciled to a bitter legacy from the Troubles…
   on 9 April 2013 at 9:35 am

   @Reader

   I don’t think SF were going on a limb – in fact that was precisely the opposite of the point I made.

   However, I’ve zero problems with people saying what they want about SF members the instant they pop; these are public figures. the private person, the family, the funeral arrangements etc should be respected, but these are public figures. It’s entirely right their life and legacy should be open to public to debate: most of their lives were, and their influence live on. I don’t see the point of false piety, or some shield they were never granted in life.

   Go to comment

7. Comment on Margaret Thatcher: An Ireland ALMOST reconciled to a bitter legacy from the Troubles…
   on 8 April 2013 at 10:39 pm

   I think you are also missing how much SF are simply representing their electorate. The revulsion for her is pretty universal among the nationalist population, and not just for the hunger strikes, given the impact of the economic policies. Facebook is ablaze today.

   I know it seems quaint when parties actually do this, rather than going for bland MOR spun bullshit but thems the facts. I reckon even faint praise of Thatcher has enough power to lose SF votes, even now.

   Go to comment

8. Comment on Meath East: We’ve seen it all before
   on 30 March 2013 at 12:13 pm

   I get what people were saying, but it always seemed fanciful. Someone needs to be able to knock down FF any time they pipe up for that to work; independents can’t provide that sort of coherent leadership by their nature, and SF have been relentlessly tarred as economic know nothings for ten years. In one sense, yes, there is a fair bit of truth, but in another this is utterly insane when you think about it. Shamefully, any traction they did get could be batted off with “Jean McConville”.

   For me the die was cast on that score the second Labour decided to go into government. You’d have to wonder at the sense, in retrospect. I can see why the LDs went into government in the UK, but Labour have got a mountain of pain for what?

   I’ll give Martin this. People assume the moment of greatest peril has arrived with the absolute drubbing. That is not the case. It is immediately after the drubbing when you are in the most danger. Inept leadership could have properly imperiled FF. He certainly managed to avoid that and provided a steady hand. Though he was probably aided by the scale of the carnage and the depth of FF’s history.

   Go to comment

9. Comment on Meath East: We’ve seen it all before
   on 30 March 2013 at 1:01 am

   What crack was anyone smoking that SF would outpoll FF at the next election? 4-5 years is an absolute eternity in politics, and FF have a pedigree, machine and a lot of residual support. SF are blown ins with a lot of baggage. It is extremely rare for political parties to take an unrecoverable knock. I think of only the Liberals in the early 20th Century, Canadian conservatives (who subsequently merged and are now the government) and the UUP. Even the UUP arguably took 3-4 election cycles to get into that position.

   At the time of the last election, commentators where saying how SF were often positioned close to the last seat, so were a threat to SF. I simply thought that they occupied many of the last seats, and were therefore extremely vulnerable. SF have hit the low end of expectations in the South for ten years no and I see no signs of changing. Even the last election was towards the lower end of possibilities. Yes, the polls have had them ahead of FF for a stretch, but that was several years out from an election in the middle of the depths of an economic crisis: meaningless.

   Furthermore, they don’t even run candidates everywhere, and there are a lot of places with no history of voting for them at all. Their medium term challenge is to stabilise around what they have, soften transfer repellence and gradually pick up councilors and activists that will provide foundations for further growth. That leaves them where they want to be; a player when it comes to forming governments in normal times, and in a much better position when Gerry shuffles off than it looked like they would be in 2008.

   Not to say they don’t have challenges, or that there isn’t some way they could play things that would put them ahead of the curve or they don’t need to provide an alternative economic policy rather than saying no a lot. But it’s bloody hard and I find the idea they were ever going to overhaul FF fanciful.

   Surprised FF have got off so lightly so quickly, I’d have expected a Conservatives in 1997 styles effect. The difference may be the incoming government had nothing like the level of optimism or goodwill. I’m not sure how this will translate in the general, though – people might vote differently if they have a prospect of becoming the government, plus it’s hard to say if the turnout if a factor.

   Go to comment

10. Comment on What Northern Ireland really needs is a REAL debate on its economic future…
    on 28 March 2013 at 6:38 pm

    It’s interesting to compare to the UK wide figures:
    http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/4001/economics/tax-revenue-sources-in-uk/

    NI
    Income tax – 19.7%
    VAT – 22.8%
    National Insurance Contributions – 15.3%
    Local Authority Revenue – 8.0%
    Corporation tax (excluding NS revenues) – 6.1%
    Fuel duties – 7.3%
    Gross operating surplus & rent – 6.1%
    Other Revenues – 13.9%

    UK
    Income tax – 30%
    VAT – 17%
    National Insurance Contributions – 19%
    Business rates – 5.0%
    Council Tax – 5.0%
    Corporation tax (excluding NS revenues) – 8%
    Fuel duties – 5%
    Other Revenues – 11%

    Corporation tax looks somewhat look, but not a huge differential. The income tax / VAT / NI split is interesting. Why is our income tax take, so low, proportionally? Lack of high net worth individuals or a lack of employment? It also suggests the VAT increase hit us harder than subsequent income tax cuts.

    The spend side would be interesting.

    Go to comment