Libertas a pan European Project : Read OP Intro Carefully - Mod

Guest

I was talking to a few non politically minded friends last weekend. I brought up the issue of Declan Ganley... he was a passing memory, as were Libertas... few could remember who he was or what Libertas were - just remember seeing the posters.

Without a major effort I don't think Ganley/Libertas will either sink or save the No Vote and I don't believe he did last time either.

Guest

cactus flower wrote:: Has it not occurred to you Toxic that it might well be Ganley who sinks the No vote?

No. The left/republican vote was never there because of Ganley. He helped bring over a large number of a particular group, the rugged individualists (who are much more common in Ireland than the left is), and they are the people that are Ganley's to lose. And the arguments presented here that you think should scare the bejapers out of people are not going to scare them. I think the only thing that is going to sink the 'no' vote is the scaremongering that has been incessant since Christmas, that we need 'influence', and that nobody will pat us on the heads and patronise us and tell us what good children we are anymore. People are scared at the moment, and that'll be exploited to the maximum (hence the calls for a snap re-run - get 'em while they're down), and I have no doubt will succeed. Ganley is not the issue. Sniping within the 'no' campaign will do us more damage than Ganley's right-wing preferences will...

Guest

I'm not talking about the left/republican vote and I'm not talking about any arguments presented about Ganley, just the impression he himself gives. Most people see through him no bother.

Guest

cactus flower wrote:: I'm not talking about the left/republican vote and I'm not talking about any arguments presented about Ganley, just the impression he himself gives. Most people see through him no bother.

I didn't say you were. I distinguished between the types of 'no' voter, and which types could be, as you suggest, 'sunk' by Ganley. I thought my response was pretty coherent anyway...

Guest

cactus flower wrote:: Has it not occurred to you Toxic that it might well be Ganley who sinks the No vote?

Excellent point

Guest

I don't think people need propoganda to scare them. They can see what is happening and are well able to scare themselves. The lack of an alternative is the biggest barrier at this stage to getting a No vote.

At the moment it appears to people that being in the Euro is marginally safer than not. The damage to Ireland from the euro / sterling exchange rate is not experienced in a direct way for most people as yet.

All of this might have changed by the time of the Referendum.

The biggest damage to the prospects of a No vote has been the appearance of paralysis and incompetence by the Government. Peoples' confidence in the country is bruised. If people are going to vote against the Lisbon Treaty given the problems and fears, I think they will need to have a clear alternative vision for international relationships, not just a "thus far and no farther" EU.

Guest

cactus flower wrote:: I don't think people need propoganda to scare them. They can see what is happening and are well able to scare themselves. The lack of an alternative is the biggest barrier at this stage to getting a No vote.

At the moment it appears to people that being in the Euro is marginally safer than not. The damage to Ireland from the euro / sterling exchange rate is not experienced in a direct way for most people as yet.

All of this might have changed by the time of the Referendum.

The biggest damage to the prospects of a No vote has been the appearance of paralysis and incompetence by the Government. Peoples' confidence in the country is bruised. If people are going to vote against the Lisbon Treaty given the problems and fears, I think they will need to have a clear alternative vision for international relationships, not just a "thus far and no farther" EU.

Thus far and no farther would be a good start. Before we construct an alternative, we must limit the damage. I have always argued for a European Community based on co-operating national sovereignties (with even, in limited cases, cession or pooling of sovereignty for the common good - and that should be a rare enough thing). More EFTA than EU. Some of the damage done so far is irreversible, so the alternatives are a tricky thing. Either way, it's not good enough that people sign up for Lisbon purely because they feel like hostages. Let's not pretend that anything else is going on here either, this is going to be won by the 'yes' side purely through duress, 'sign up or they'll hate us and let us drown.' If that's the road we're going down in the name of being 'realistic', then let's never pretend that there's anything remotely free about our assent to European Treaties from here on in. In fact, let's not bother with the voting thing at all, why waste the money on, essentially,a farcical parody of democracy?...

Guest

Thank you for the link to the Referendum Commission. It took a while but I got through it, phew. First impressions, what a ridiculous format, each participant of this Q&A session asks a series of '20 questions' of Mr Ganley. Each round Mr Ganley can pick and choose from a pool of like 40 questions; but he rarely addressed anything contentious. Instead he appeared to ignore questions about what exactly he objected to in the Lisbon Treaty. His avoidance off the specifics was remarked upon by commissioners.

Mr Ganley did mention the 'Larkin declaration', what is that?

Guest

snapple drinker wrote:: Thank you for the link to the Referendum Commission. It took a while but I got through it, phew. First impressions, what a ridiculous format, each participant of this Q&A session asks a series of '20 questions' of Mr Ganley. Each round Mr Ganley can pick and choose from a pool of like 40 questions; but he rarely addressed anything contentious. Instead he appeared to ignore questions about what exactly he objected to in the Lisbon Treaty. His avoidance off the specifics was remarked upon by commissioners.

Mr Ganley did mention the 'Larkin declaration', what is that?

Not Larkin - trying to find the right reference for you. Ah here it is - the Laeken Declaration - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_Councils#Laeken_2001

Agree with you, btw, about the format - mainly politicians listening to sound of own voices and no solid answers from Ganley on any matters of fact.

Guest

toxic avenger wrote:

cactus flower wrote:: I don't think people need propoganda to scare them. They can see what is happening and are well able to scare themselves. The lack of an alternative is the biggest barrier at this stage to getting a No vote.

At the moment it appears to people that being in the Euro is marginally safer than not. The damage to Ireland from the euro / sterling exchange rate is not experienced in a direct way for most people as yet.

All of this might have changed by the time of the Referendum.

The biggest damage to the prospects of a No vote has been the appearance of paralysis and incompetence by the Government. Peoples' confidence in the country is bruised. If people are going to vote against the Lisbon Treaty given the problems and fears, I think they will need to have a clear alternative vision for international relationships, not just a "thus far and no farther" EU.

Thus far and no farther would be a good start. Before we construct an alternative, we must limit the damage. I have always argued for a European Community based on co-operating national sovereignties (with even, in limited cases, cession or pooling of sovereignty for the common good - and that should be a rare enough thing). More EFTA than EU. Some of the damage done so far is irreversible, so the alternatives are a tricky thing. Either way, it's not good enough that people sign up for Lisbon purely because they feel like hostages. Let's not pretend that anything else is going on here either, this is going to be won by the 'yes' side purely through duress, 'sign up or they'll hate us and let us drown.' If that's the road we're going down in the name of being 'realistic', then let's never pretend that there's anything remotely free about our assent to European Treaties from here on in. In fact, let's not bother with the voting thing at all, why waste the money on, essentially,a farcical parody of democracy?...

Whether we like it or not, that is an agenda shared by the US right wing:

Quote :: The recent demise of the anti-American Schroeder-Chirac partnership has allowed for renewed optimism in Washington about relations between the United States and the European Union (EU). However, the reemergence of the draft EU constitution[1] represents a fundamental threat to American interests far more profound than the hostility of any one European leader. This draft constitution challenges U.S. strategic, diplomatic, judicial, and military interests. It enshrines modish and ephemeral values as supreme law for 25 separate nation-states with the intention of fully globalizing its lofty and elite-driven policies.

The United States needs to recognize the threat posed by Brussels' drive to centralize huge swathes of public policy as having significant negative implications for America and respond to that threat by applying appropriate diplomatic pressure to ensure that U.S. interests are upheld within the transatlantic alliance.

Sally MacNamara - The Heritage Foundation.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/bg1991.cfm

Guest

cactus flower wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

cactus flower wrote:: I don't think people need propoganda to scare them. They can see what is happening and are well able to scare themselves. The lack of an alternative is the biggest barrier at this stage to getting a No vote.

At the moment it appears to people that being in the Euro is marginally safer than not. The damage to Ireland from the euro / sterling exchange rate is not experienced in a direct way for most people as yet.

All of this might have changed by the time of the Referendum.

The biggest damage to the prospects of a No vote has been the appearance of paralysis and incompetence by the Government. Peoples' confidence in the country is bruised. If people are going to vote against the Lisbon Treaty given the problems and fears, I think they will need to have a clear alternative vision for international relationships, not just a "thus far and no farther" EU.

Thus far and no farther would be a good start. Before we construct an alternative, we must limit the damage. I have always argued for a European Community based on co-operating national sovereignties (with even, in limited cases, cession or pooling of sovereignty for the common good - and that should be a rare enough thing). More EFTA than EU. Some of the damage done so far is irreversible, so the alternatives are a tricky thing. Either way, it's not good enough that people sign up for Lisbon purely because they feel like hostages. Let's not pretend that anything else is going on here either, this is going to be won by the 'yes' side purely through duress, 'sign up or they'll hate us and let us drown.' If that's the road we're going down in the name of being 'realistic', then let's never pretend that there's anything remotely free about our assent to European Treaties from here on in. In fact, let's not bother with the voting thing at all, why waste the money on, essentially,a farcical parody of democracy?...

Whether we like it or not, that is an agenda shared by the US right wing:

Quote :: The recent demise of the anti-American Schroeder-Chirac partnership has allowed for renewed optimism in Washington about relations between the United States and the European Union (EU). However, the reemergence of the draft EU constitution[1] represents a fundamental threat to American interests far more profound than the hostility of any one European leader. This draft constitution challenges U.S. strategic, diplomatic, judicial, and military interests. It enshrines modish and ephemeral values as supreme law for 25 separate nation-states with the intention of fully globalizing its lofty and elite-driven policies.

The United States needs to recognize the threat posed by Brussels' drive to centralize huge swathes of public policy as having significant negative implications for America and respond to that threat by applying appropriate diplomatic pressure to ensure that U.S. interests are upheld within the transatlantic alliance.

Sally MacNamara - The Heritage Foundation.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Europe/bg1991.cfm

Irrelevant. Unless you make your choices based on what p1sses off the Americans the most. I oppose centralisation and 'one size fits all' (and, note, Libertas supports a strong federalism, surely not in the interests of these people either) because I think it's crazy. If a load of neo-con fruitcakes oppose it also, that's not going to make me change my mind...

Guest

I've replied to that here: https://machinenation.forumakers.com/world-politics-and-events-f27/the-usa-view-of-the-lisbon-treaty-t2021.htm#70357

Guest

Toxic here's one for your sort of lefty heartstrings

Quote :: Libertas Has No Time for Workers' Rights! Interns low wages raise concerns

Concern
has been expressed by Catherine Halloran, Political Correspondent with
the tabloid Irish Daily Star that Libertas have no regard for workers
rights. She is outraged and warns studdents to beware of Libertas.
However she got her sums wrong. The hourly rate for working 40 hours a
week at €700 a month is only €4.03. This is even lower than the rate of
4.30 which halloran thinks is a violation of workers rights.

If you are a Libertas intern let this blog know what it's like. Email peoplekorps@gmail.com

read Catherine Halloran blog post below

Poor Libertas Interns
Catherine HalloranPolitical Correspondent with the Irish Daily Star newspaper in Dublin.

If there is one thing guaranteed to bore the cotton socks off anyone at
the moment, it is the mere mention of the Lisbon Treaty - but bear with
me!

Workers rights was one of the main issues of contention last
June when the Irish turned remarkably frosty towards anything European.

But Declan Ganley's anti-treaty group Libertas really are taking the
biscuit when it comes to workers rights - it is looking for interns but
is only prepared to pay them a misery €700 a month while they live in
Brussels.

Ganley's Libertas is building a European army of interns ahead of this summer's European elections.

And as part of its plan for world domination, it will be taking on interns and full-time staff across Europe.

In their online advertisement they are looking to hire 'highly-qualified
and talented students for a period of five months in Brussels'.

But let's look at this more closely. Considering the intern will work at
least eight hours a day for five days a week, that gives a working week
of 40 hours. With four weeks in a month, that gives the sum total of
160 hours a month.

With a pay packet of €700 a month, that gives an hourly rate of just €4.30 - far, far less than the Minimum Wage.

Students, be warned!

Guest

Frightened Albanian wrote:

Toxic here's one for your sort of lefty heartstrings

Quote :: Libertas Has No Time for Workers' Rights! Interns low wages raise concerns

Concern
has been expressed by Catherine Halloran, Political Correspondent with
the tabloid Irish Daily Star that Libertas have no regard for workers
rights. She is outraged and warns studdents to beware of Libertas.
However she got her sums wrong. The hourly rate for working 40 hours a
week at €700 a month is only €4.03. This is even lower than the rate of
4.30 which halloran thinks is a violation of workers rights.

If you are a Libertas intern let this blog know what it's like. Email peoplekorps@gmail.com

read Catherine Halloran blog post below

Poor Libertas Interns
Catherine HalloranPolitical Correspondent with the Irish Daily Star newspaper in Dublin.

If there is one thing guaranteed to bore the cotton socks off anyone at
the moment, it is the mere mention of the Lisbon Treaty - but bear with
me!

Workers rights was one of the main issues of contention last
June when the Irish turned remarkably frosty towards anything European.

But Declan Ganley's anti-treaty group Libertas really are taking the
biscuit when it comes to workers rights - it is looking for interns but
is only prepared to pay them a misery €700 a month while they live in
Brussels.

Ganley's Libertas is building a European army of interns ahead of this summer's European elections.

And as part of its plan for world domination, it will be taking on interns and full-time staff across Europe.

In their online advertisement they are looking to hire 'highly-qualified
and talented students for a period of five months in Brussels'.

But let's look at this more closely. Considering the intern will work at
least eight hours a day for five days a week, that gives a working week
of 40 hours. With four weeks in a month, that gives the sum total of
160 hours a month.

With a pay packet of €700 a month, that gives an hourly rate of just €4.30 - far, far less than the Minimum Wage.

Students, be warned!

They're interns for crying out loud, many internships are unapid, many will offer cost of living expenses and others a monthly stipend. If one cared to do any research (starting at looking up "intern" in the dictionary) one would see that €700 a month for an internship in a startup organisation is pretty competitive.

Also, they knew what was on offer when they applied. These are all people who wanted to get involved.

http://jobs.euractiv.com/job_offers?filter2=11

Guest

Its for rich kids, innit?

Guest

Anyway, the types of people who would be up for that kind of thing generally wont have been raised in the Ballymun Flats, I'm sure they wont starve...

Guest

Hi Cookie, well O Halloran seems genuinely concerned, they may only be interns but they are people too!!!

Guest

toxic avenger wrote:: Anyway, the types of people who would be up for that kind of thing generally wont have been raised in the Ballymun Flats, I'm sure they wont starve...

You mean they would be the children of the elites?

Guest

Guest

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:: Anyway, the types of people who would be up for that kind of thing generally wont have been raised in the Ballymun Flats, I'm sure they wont starve...

You mean they would be the children of the elites?

No, but they generally won't be called Jacinta or Kyle. That goes for virtually all political anoraks who join parties/movements, even more true for the socialists in my experience...

Guest

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:: Anyway, the types of people who would be up for that kind of thing generally wont have been raised in the Ballymun Flats, I'm sure they wont starve...

You mean they would be the children of the elites?

No, but they generally won't be called Jacinta or Kyle. That goes for virtually all political anoraks who join parties/movements, even more true for the socialists in my experience...

So they are not called Jacinta or Kyle and they are not being exploited on slave wages just because they are not from Ballymun and they are the progeny of the elites? I think you mean kids who have parents wealthy enough to pay for a flat in Brussels and subvent their living expenses
ie the elites.

Guest

Frightened Albanian wrote:: Hi Cookie, well O Halloran seems genuinely concerned, they may only be interns but they are people too!!!

Yes and they are people who signed up to be interns and knew theyt would be given €700 a month, which for an internship in a startup organisation is pretty competitive.

Guest

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:

toxic avenger wrote:: Anyway, the types of people who would be up for that kind of thing generally wont have been raised in the Ballymun Flats, I'm sure they wont starve...

You mean they would be the children of the elites?

No, but they generally won't be called Jacinta or Kyle. That goes for virtually all political anoraks who join parties/movements, even more true for the socialists in my experience...

So they are not called Jacinta or Kyle and they are not being exploited on slave wages just because they are not from Ballymun and they are the progeny of the elites?

The first half of that, they might well be from Ballymun for all I know, and if they were the progeny of elites then they would be doing other things entirely...

Guest

cookiemonster wrote:

Frightened Albanian wrote:: Hi Cookie, well O Halloran seems genuinely concerned, they may only be interns but they are people too!!!

Yes and they are people who signed up to be interns and knew theyt would be given €700 a month, which for an internship in a startup organisation is pretty competitive.

So workers rights don't apply as they can getin on the ground floor and see eg the Libertas bid for funding explode before their very eyes? I can see why that type of close inspection of failure might help young people not make the same mistakes themselves.
Was Ganley himself ever an inetern?
I hear he was a teaboy is that same thing?

Guest

toxic avenger wrote:: So they are not called Jacinta or Kyle and they are not being exploited on slave wages just because they are not from Ballymun and they are the progeny of the elites?

The first half of that, they might well be from Ballymun for all I know, and if they were the progeny of elites then they would be doing other things entirely...[/quote]

like what?

» The Privatisation of Irish Politics
» New Party Of European Left (EL) to fight European Elections
» The European Council - Not So Transparent
» European Election Manifestos
» European Elections - Who's Standing for What ?