Alternative History: Nixon’s shadow.

President Nixon: Tragically Slain in Dallas, 1963.

PRESIDENT NIXON DEAD. SHOT IN DALLAS. VICE PRESIDENT CABOT LODGE SWORN IN AS PRESIDENT.

The murder of Richard M. Nixon on the 22nd November 1963 by Lee Harvey Oswald brought a meteoric political career to a cruelly abrupt end. The man who had risen from entering Congress in 1946 to defeating Senator John F. Kennedy in the razor thin election of 1960 was almost certain to be re-elected in 1964, given his adroit handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis, tough line on Vietnam (remembering Truman’s “losing China”) and his hard-line on civil rights solidifying black votes into the Republican column. The death of the young, cheerful and endearingly awkward war hero president stunned America.

Vice President Henry Cabot Lodge easily defeated Senator Lyndon Baines Johnson, running on a thinly veiled racist (against his own better judgement, he admitted years later) states rights campaign the following year. As history now shows, the Republican landslide of 1964 was the last good thing to happen to the former Massachusetts senator. Read more…

Did Glenn Beck strangle a male prostitute to death? No he didn’t. But let’s talk about it anyway.

One of the more disturbing things I’ve come across recently is this poll figure from the US saying that 18% of people polled believe that  President Obama is a Muslim. What’s particularly worrying, indeed surreal, is that the number of people who believe that he is a Christian (which he is, although I can’t believe we actually have to discuss this stuff) has dropped from 48% to 34%. In other words, people who actually were aware of the truth have now swung over to believing the lie.

What is truly scary about this is the Goebbels-size lie that it is, that no matter how much light is thrown on this nonsense it continues to grow, against all rational thought. It is hard enough trying to convince people of real things in the world, but for the President of the United States to actually have to expend time, energy and effort dealing with this nonsense is quite extraordinary. The other aspect of this thing is what a media created story this is. If you ran a poll asking whether Glenn Beck had once strangled a male prostitute to death (which he hasn’t, by the way) you will get a small percentage who will say that he has. If you then report that story, that creates attention for the ludicrous proposition, which almost guarantees that the next poll will show an even higher number of people believe that Glenn Beck once strangled a male prostitute to death. Then people start googling as to whether Glenn Beck strangled a male prostitute to death. Go on, do it now. Which now means that there is a media story that says that a growing number of people believe that Glenn Beck strangled a male prostitute to death, even though he didn’t, and the proposition is outrageous. This is how this crap gets traction. 

The one hope is the argument made by some pollsters that many voters tend to make an emotional call about a candidate, and then look for a rational reason to justify that belief. The fact is, the sort of people who believe that the President is Muslim regardless of the facts are people who will probably never vote for the guy even if he personally put a bullet ino the back of Osama Bin Laden’s head.  

News from Ireland 2020: Surprise Yes vote on Nuclear Plant.

Coming soon to Carnsore.

Wexford 2020: Despite a series of opinion polls predicting defeat by a 10 point margin, Wexford County today voted by 57.1% in favour of the ESB proposal to build a nuclear power plant at Carnsore Point. Leaders of the NO campaign were quick to condemn the result, pointing out that the voters had been bribed by the Community Gain package that had been promised by the government if the proposal was ratified by the voters of the county.

Under the package, every existing home will be entitled to a a tax free lump sum of €5000 each year, as a recognition of the county’s willingness to “bear the burden” of hosting the nation’s sole nuclear power plant. It is hoped that the scheme, which will last for 20 years, and cost the ESB approximately €28 million per annum, will protect property prices in the county.

The leader of the NO campaign, Sebastian Wilcox-Smyth, speaking at the count, said that the people of Wexford had no right to impose nuclear power on the “ordinary people”, and would be taking the matter to the High Court. Wilcox-Smyth was involved in a controversy during the campaign when it emerged that his group, People Before Everything, had previously campaigned against the building of wind farms near anywhere “where human beings dwell.” The YES campaign suggested building them on Mars.  

Osama Bin Laden endorses Gingrich/Palin ticket in 2012

Evil bigoted terrorist mastermind Osama Bin Laden has endorsed former house speaker Newt Gingrich and former Gov. Sarah Palin for the Republican presidential nomination in 2012.

Speaking from secret cave lair no. 345, Bin Laden is quoted as saying: “I have spent a lifetime trying to convince young Muslims that the United States is prejudiced against  Islam. Then they go and elect Obama, a man who has some actual knowledge of Islam, and treat Muslim soldiers in the US army as equals. They even have a Muslim in Congress! This is what I’m up against, so I really appreciate Newt and Sarah stirring up bigotry over the Islamic Centre two blocks from Ground Zero. Seriously, I could not have written it better myself, well, other than “We surrender, Praise Allah!” But now I can go to young American Muslims fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan, who laud the US, and go “In your face, over here, working for the honky man!”. If I’m not trying to raise money to put Newt and Sarah into the White House in 2012, then my uncle’s a rabbi! It’s not as much a donation as an investment.”

The Gingrich/Palin approach to the proposed centre, thus ensuring that US Muslims know their place, is part of a radical new Republican approach to hot button issues the GOP hopes to showcase in the November midterm elections. Another issue is that of attitudes towards homosexuality, where Republican members of congress and formers chairs of the RNC are having gay sex regularly so as to be able to lecture family values voters on the evils of a hot gay banging with a buff intern named Chad. Repeatedly.

The Four Irish Economic Classes: A Primer.

Who creates it, and who wants to spend it?

Let’s be honest with ourselves. Most political disputes, indeed most social disputes, come down to money. Yes, we can have issues over gay rights and what flag who flies where and who apologises to whom, but when it comes down to it, it’s cash that dominates. Curiously, as a society, we don’t debate that reality much, preferring to debate how we would like to spend it (more Resources!) and being pretty uncomfortable as to how it is created.
We have in our society, more or less, four economic classes, and it would do us no harm to pay a bit more attention to their roles in how we live our lives.

The Creators.
These are the people who create wealth. Whether it is writing a song that others buy, or inventing a product or service that others will pay for. It’s true, they need the framework of a state about them which protects their investment and their right to benefit from it, but broadly speaking, they create more wealth than they use up. Some are crooks, and use corrupt practices, but broadly, they bring more Euro to society’s table then was there beforehand. They’re not all millionaires either. Some own corner shops and drive taxis and write chick lit novels. The important thing is that the create money out of pretty much nothing.  

The Value Adders.
This would be the biggest group, covering most of us. We work for someone else, taking their wealth and adding value to it, whether as lawyers drafting contracts or putting cans of beans into cardboard boxes. We don’t create wealth, but add a bit on. Again, our key attribute is that we bring more to the table than we take. 

The Takers.
This is, ironically, the most socially diverse group, from big farmers receiving CAP payments to dodgy bankers to guys making millions merely by rezoning land, to people permanently on the state payroll or social welfare. They bring little to the table, in that most of them pay taxes but take more money from society (and the state) than they bring to it. The key is that their wealth is primarily as a result of the tangible efforts of others.

The Utilised.
These are the weak, and again, not necessarily the poorest in society. They are the exploited, underpaid workers or consumers, the people big business and the unions and the state roll over. The difference between them and The Takers on welfare is that they can actually add value, and bring more to the collective pot, if only they were helped.  

Here’s the problem: In Ireland, only The Value Adders and The Takers are regarded as legitimate. The Creators are despised by the jealous, and The Utilised are just ignored, with what might help them instead going to the better organised Takers.

A pension for the Mayor?

John Gormley has an interesting opportunity with the Dublin Mayor legislation to deal with an anomaly that has crept into the public service, that is, the huge public sector pensions. The deal was always that although public service workers traditionally earned less than private sector workers, they were rewarded for that with relative job security and a good pension. Fair enough. But why should the proposed Dublin Mayor have his pension paid for by the taxpayer? After all, he or she will earn at least €100k per annum which is good money in anyone’s book, so why not require him/her to pay for their own pension, like most Irish workers?

The minister should put his foot down on this issue and the other nonsense that says that we won’t get high calibre candidates if we don’t pay at least €200k. If there is one thing that the last two years has taught us about Irish public life, it’s that, unlike other countries,  high pay is no guarantee of anything. I’ve been in touch with the Department of the Environment’s press office to clarify the facts of the issue, and they’re normally quite good at getting back promptly on this stuff, so watch this space, because Gormley has a real chance here to stand up for the little guy. 

An Occasional Guide to Irish Politics: “Fairness”

Fairness? Fairness? I'll give you a damn good trashing!

“Fairness” is the Scaletrix of Irish politics, in that the debate goes round in circles and circles and is incapable of a new direction. It starts from a simple proposition. We all believe in fairness, don’t we? You’d want to be Jabba the Hutt to be against fairness. Everyone nods sagely at the desire for Irish society to be built on fairness. But don’t dare ask for details, because if you do, you’re a hateful Thatcherite, a Victorian despatcher of children down the mines, their little tummies aching for a crust, a stale crust at that. Or worse still, you’re Michael McDowell.

But what is fairness? Is it fair that some people are going to bed hungry? Of course not. Is it fair that some families are scraping together euros and cents to pay for their kids schoolbooks? How could it be? What about if one of those families spent their money on a kickass 42″ Plasma screen TV, whilst their neighbours didn’t? Who is more deserving of fairness now? What about the mother who works overtime in a launderette to pay for her daughter’s maths grind? Is it fair for her to pay more tax than the mother who’s on the scratcher, after all, she brings home more money, therefore she’s richer, therefore it’s only fair that she should pay more tax, isn’t it? It’s only fair.

But taxing the rich, we can all agree that that is fair, right? Of course it is. Higher taxes are the price of membership of our society, but is it fair to want to punish someone for being successful? Is it fair to want to take half of someone’s take home pay, one in two euro they make, for the crime of creating a business and (the  bastards) giving people jobs? Is that fair? Is it fair to have rich people at all? Would it be fairer to have no rich people at all, even if it meant we were all poorer?

Maybe it is, maybe it isn’t. But want to debate the idea? No, because we don’t do debates here, it wouldn’t be fair. 

Anti-AV Tories have little faith in democracy (or themselves)

Listening to some of the arguments made against the Alternative Vote in the UK is just plain baffling to Irish (and I suspect, Australian) voters. The key argument being used by the Tories is that it will result in a permanent Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition. That argument assumes that a majority of the British electorate will always vote Labour and Lib Dem, regardless of how bad the government got. They start from the position that the Tories are in-built losers who can never convince anything close to a majority of their fellow Brits that they might be worth having a go. This is the party of Churchill and Thatcher? Bunch of blouses. They would have given the Isle of White to Galtieri.

The other main argument being used is that AV allows for small parties votes to “unfairly” have two votes, proof if anything that the Tories have by far the best suppliers of psychotropic mindbending drugs. What they are saying is that if you vote Tory in Scotland, and your candidate comes third, transferring that vote to that voter’s second preference is somehow giving them an unfair advantage? Even if it means that the elected MP has more actual support in the constutuency than his/her nearest rival?

The irony of all this is that if the Lib Dems can’t get their first preferences up in enough seats to take advantage of second preferences, they’ll be wiped out. AV could turn Britain back into a two big tent party state, with the Tories hoovering up UKIP second preferences, and Labour welcoming home BNP votes.

Guest Blog: Why should European democracy matter?

Activists of the Party of European Socialists (PES) are campaigning for the PES to hold pan-European primary elections to choose the party’s candidate for the Presidency of the European Commsison in 2014. Declining turnout in European elections, democratic deficit or disconnect and an abiding feeling that the EU is remote and over-complicated all strengthen the demand for more democracy in the European Union. Decisions are made for us, especially in the European Commission, by people with an unsatisfactory mandate from us. The Campaign for a PES Primary tackles this head-on.

The Irish government is utterly overwhelmed by and patently unfit to address the profound crises that Ireland is suffering, but what of the EU’s response? With its eurozone structures, capacity to co-ordinate and lead government action and substantial budgets for regional and structural funding the EU possesses significant resources to bring us through these difficult times. But the European Commission has demonstrated extraordinary lassitude in mobilising a continent-wide effort to create jobs, protect standards of living and promote strategies for economic recovery and growth. Led by José Manuel Barroso, the Commission has shown itself unequal to the task.

The Commission likes to portray itself as a college of independent, supra-national public servants, but in reality it is a highly political institution. Its membership reflects the political affiliations of national governments, and it is confirmed in office by a European Parliament, whose political configuration the governments are obliged to observe in their choice of Commission President. As the Conservatives, represented in Ireland by Fine Gael, “won” the European elections last June, it is their representative, José Manuel Barroso, who was returned to office as Commission President. It is the outcome of those elections that has given us a Commission that has shown such crippling complacency and disregard. Read more…

A Good Book worth reading: The Italian Secretary

If you’re a fellow Sherlock Holmes fan, then Caleb Carr’s “The Italian Secretary” will entertain. The central mystery itself, about murders in Queen Victoria’s residence in Holyroodhouse, is only so-so, but where the book will satisfy Holmesians is in the writing style (told throgh the Conan Doyle device of Dr. Watson’s writings) and the relationship between Holmes, Watson, and Holmes’s equally brilliant brother Mycroft. Carr manages to convey the relationship between the three men and the subtle components each brings to the relationship, with the Holmes brothers being extraordinary in their skills of detection, but with Watson acting almost as their emissary to the real world. It’s good, distracting fun.

Don’t forget, by the way, that the BBC’s excellent “Sherlock” is out next week on DVD. If you missed it on TV, you’re in for a treat.

Finally, to round off this Holmesian missive, I wonder did anyone see the funny and quite touching Sherlock Holmes sketch on That Mitchell and Webb Look? Mitchell plays an elderly decrepit Holmes in a retirement home, with Webb’s Watson trying to maintain the facade that his failing detective powers are still impressive. The final scene actually brought a catch to my throat, and goes to show that, as Jack Dee, Robbie Coltrane and Robin Williams proved before, comedy actors can sometimes really excel at dramatic moments. Well done Mitchell and Webb.