THE MORNING AFTER.....
Saturday, March 10, 2007 at 10:35AM So here we are, the Saturday morning after the final election results have come in following the Northern Ireland election. Saturday tends to be a quieter day here on the boards and it so it can be a useful time for a little reflection without facing the white heat of ATW Monday-Fridays!
I wanted to do a follow-on post to my "The Frankie Goes to Holywood election" piece yesterday. Contrary to what some felt, it was NOT written in an anger-fueled state. In fact, I was more entertained than anything else. You see where I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused.....
First, I wanted to congratulate all those who have won, and to commiserate with all those who lost. Politics is a tough old game - an emotional roller-coaster, and certainly something all sensible people should avoid!
I am reminded of the old adage..."He knows nothing, but he thinks he knows everything. This clearly points to a career in politics!" There will be some this morning who will be looking forward to the lucrative financial payments to come, and there will be those who now have to try and find gainful employment in the real world. The margin between victory and defeat may be small, but the cash margin is always huge!
Next, I wanted to posit the question; When the electorate speaks, do we have to agree with them? People have asked me if I will accept the clear view of the NI electorate that establishing a power-sharing executive with the IRA's frontmen is both morally acceptable and politically the way forward. My answer is - not at all. In fact, not a chance!!!
I choose to dissent from the common view. In a democracy, that is my right. I also can seek to establish a voice of opposition to that which is being done in the "name of the people". Remember, almost 40% of "the people" chose NOT to vote for any party at all. This is sizeable chunk of the populace. So when we hear unionists waffle about speaking "for the unionist people" - that is untrue. They only speak for those who voted for them, no more and no less.
The media has been asking who are the big winners and the big losers. I think it must be recognised that Paisley's DUP and the IRA's Sinn Fein are the big winners. The big losers are those who thought that the electorate was sophisticated and moral enough to reject bombers and gangsters in Government. Far from it - they salivate at the notion. "Get into power and help us" is their pitiful plea.
The Ulster Unionists are also big time losers - seeing a third of their seats vanishing, and it could have been worse. Next time it WILL be worse as they appear to have concluded that things can't get any worse and that they continue with Si Reg as their gloriously inept leader! Likewise the SDLP, under the hapless Durka Durka Mark Durkan struggle along, losing to IRA/Sinn Fein, and claiming that things can only get better when it fact they must have worked out that they will only get worse!
The media want to pretend that a One Seat gain for Alliance and the retention of a seat by the UVF linked PUP are monumental triumphs for common sense. What nonsense. I have stated that I like the Alliance Leader David Ford and so I wish his Party well. I have no time whatsoever however for the PUP "Leader" Dawn Purvis, who has managed to retain a seat for her paramilitary-linked Party in East Belfast. I note the media kept quiet about the annihilation of the PUP candidates in the other two constituencies where they stood.
Also amongst the losers are the anti-power sharing with terrorists fringe unionists, most notably my former colleague Robert McCartney. I am genuinely sorry that Bob has lost his seat, though would rather he had decided to follow Andrew McCann's advice and NOT stand in the first place. As for the others, they were an odd bunch and all predetermined to lose. I think the lack of a well-funded well-known central Party structure determined their fate.
The capture of a seat by the Green Party has also been hailed as a "breakthrough". For moonbattery, perhaps, but nothing else. North Down has always been a maverick constituency, and the fact that the Green's scored here is unsurprising. I'm sure that the good citizens of North Down would also probably welcome an Islamic candidate. How awfully nice of them to stand here, don't you think?
And so, the dust settles. Those who place their faith in politicians "doing a deal" can get on with it. I put MY faith in my Maker, no-one else. I was very touched when Charles from Texas started a web site called "Jeremiah's Helper" - picking up on a reference I had made regarding myself. Still am - a great compliment. I shall continue to be Jeremiah if needs be - but I notice that on ATW there are more than a few others who are also prepared to speak out - to challenge the political consensus - to dissent from that which is often done in our name. The Northern Ireland electorate have spoken. Well, I'll also keep speaking and thank God that there are plenty who seem curious in hearing my point of view! My trip through the modern political wilderness gets more interesting.....and I get more determined - thanks to all my helpers.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (65)
>>notably my former colleague Robert McCartney<<
David, I, and probably quite a few other outsiders, would be very interested in hearing your view of what went wrong with the UKUP back then. Not a look-back-in-anger, just a historical appraisal of the way a party that once offered hope to many collapsed in on itself.
If you've already written about this elsewhere, then a reference please.
Meant to say how nice it was to speak with you the other evening. You made a number of strong points. I think I should do a "The decline and fall of the UKUP" piece as it is full of interesting stuff.
Even the shinners? ;)
David when it comes to the 40% who didn't vote I have no sympathy. If you don't vote you have no right to winge.
Even if they didn't like any of the parties they could have spolit their vote. On the most part they were just lazy.
Agreed a detailed piece on the rise and fall of the UKUP would be most interesting.
Wouldn't a series of posts on here be an idea?
No, as you said earlier in your piece, only 63% of them have spoken.
That remaining 37% of non-voters is the biggest power bloc in the province.
They have had their chance to speak. If they didnt do so they cant complain.
I thought that quote might match your feelings to an extent.
We'll have to wait and see what this is really going to mean in practical terms.
>> That remaining 37% of non-voters is the biggest power bloc in the province<<
Paul, no it isn't.
It is made up of Nationalist who were too lazy/indifferent, Unionists who were too lazy/indifferent, dissident republicans who were too lazy/indifferent, very energetic and principled anarchists, those who can't read, those who don't know and don't want to know about politics and those who didn't ever know/care there was an election.
i.e. it is a disparate and unmanageable mix, without any political effect. It's quite presumptuous for anybody to hitch them onto their political bandwagon as a default.
The Northern Ireland electorate HAS (for emphasis, not correcting grammar) spoken. Those who don’t vote, don’t count.
Cunningham
But it does have or, at least will have, a political effect-the gap between those voting for either Irish nationalism or Unionism is too narrow now for either to take for granted what will happen even in the short-term.
Neither *side* is capable of thinking outside the sectarian box yet, in order to appeal to a large enough number of this 37%, some new arguments are going to have to be thought up pretty sharpish.
(And on a purely pedantic note, I think with "electorate" being an uncountable noun, it can use both singular and plural parts of the verb?)
Thanks for your comments and your endurance in wading through my words!
Chris Gaskin,
I chose my words carefully. Congrats to ALL who won. I may not agree (will never agree) with Sinn Fein but I try not to be churlish.
Mahons,
Loved that quote. I've read quite a few articles by Koch - an interesting guy!
Cunningham/Chris,
Maybe I should explain that first of all, I did vote, But for none of the above! I believe that the electorate here should follow the Australian example and be given the choice to vote for NONE of the above but legally required to vote. That way, there is no ambiguity about the 37-39% that refuse to vote.
Paul P,
Do you think a short series of profiles on local parties - partic unionists which I fully understand - would be interesting?
I have a follow up idea. If the "None of the Above" option is a decent % - let's say around 25%- then we LIMIT the powers of the parties that get elected. If "None of the above" gets even higher - indicating that there is a very large % who distrust all of the named parties - limit powers even more. If political parties cannot appeal widely enough to us - why should re reward 'em?
Colm,
Yes, it's all about limiting the power of the political class and ensuring they never take us for granted. Your idea is a good one.
My take on it is this. It's "compulsory" to be on the voter register but it's not compulsory to vote. Well, I haven't been on the register since 2001 and I've never heard of anyone being prosecuted for refusing to register.
Why not make it compulsory to VOTE with a fine of £100 if you don't? They have it in other countries like Australia and they get a turnout of 95% instead of 60%. That's got to be a more democratic outcome.
Just so long as you are allowed to write "**** off" on your ballot paper.
I remember wee Norman alright!
Sammy,
Stuff the "academic point of view" - no one needs that. As for my pointed bile, well.......
Disagree David. The UKUP were, for all their transience, a tremendously important political phenomenon. Maybe I'll do it - if only I had the time...
As a central part of the UKUP at the time, I suppose I have a unique insight. I have affection for the ideals we espoused, some good memories, some very bad, and a few laughs along the way. Bob and I had some thrilling encounters with the Mowlams, Mandelsons, Mitchells, etc. Not sure why an "academic" analysis is required. In my experience, there is more to politics than academia.
you're in fantasy politics ....no good can come of it....83% want a deal.. that's reality man !
and David you DON'T write with bile, you may regulary have to defend against it but thats the nature of the beast
If 83% of people supported unionist parties would you become a unionist ?
remeber DV is always going on about democracy ?????
Percy,
Speaking as an outsider,what do you think of Planet Earth?
What do you mean by 'accept the decision'. That is not the isuue. I am talking about changing opinions. David cannot stop powersharing but just because a majority of the voting electorate has approved it doesn't mean he has to change his long held opposition to it, any more than I presume you would change your nationalist perspective regardless of how popular unionism became.
DV may not change his beliefs, what I' saying is there's no victory in that, its a losing ticket.
setting yourself up as a prophet of doom is crazy, suprised you can't see that! you ought to be telling him off , not me. sitting on the fence colm as usual pleasing everyone. crap!
Freed from desire, mind and senses purified. People want more and more freedom and love.
anyone who the denies the children of the future is frankly, with lucifer.
cheers.
this is what I'm talking about:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbxduwOs6C8
we've not got time for eternal condemnation David, personality politics is rubbish.
leave judging to GOD pleeeeeeeeeeeeease
Whose sitting on the fence ? I am taking David's side against yours. He believes what he believes, and isn't about to abandon that to follow the crowd. I am not specifically opposed to the setting up of the power sharing executive, but I do respect those who hold true to their principles and won't abandon them just to join in the popular throng.
saying that is like saying : I respect the captain of the titanic for going down with his ship.
And why would you not respect the captain for sacrificing his life to ensure another space on the rescue boats for others ?
ne c'est pas?
Now I'll never stop loving any of you.
Nite nite
Ireland 19 Scotland 18 close shave ;)
I have grown a little more extreme as the years have progressed. Not on issues you understand since I am a moderate. BUT. I think a colossal amount of people shouldn't have a vote in the first place. Why? Because most people are easily duped morons. For every person that has an IQ more than 100 there is a person with an IQ less than 100. That is how we get a "bell shaped distribution" people! If you can't understand the concept of a bell shaped distribution then guess what? You shouldn't have a vote because you are too stupid to understand what having a vote truly means. For example, a retard (you'll get no PC crap from me) still has a vote, as do criminals and the insane. Also as far as I'm concerned if you don't vote then you have no right to complain when you get stuck with a government you don't like.
I'm sure it's obvious that I'm in a bad mood. Rant over!
So early in the morning and the smutty humour starts already :)
But you, my friend, are slipping when you missed that one LOL
I thought I'd be generous and let you get one in first ;)
Just from this week??