Economic Ideology - A Dead Concept in Irish Politics??

I contend that economic ideology is thankfully considered to be of little importance by the Irish electorate.

My views on the redundancy of economic ideology are profoundly influenced by Joseph Stiglitz's book "Globalisation and its Discontents" and by Peter Watson's (non-political) book "A Terrible Beauty" which details the progression of 20th century thought. Stigltz showed how ideologues in the IMF and World Bank made wrong-headed and devastating decisions based on their economic ideologies. Stiglitz showed that complex problems deserved individual attention and complex solutions having regard to individual circumstances (needs be to oversimplify here). Watson's book shows how this postmodern way of thinking, abandoning ideologies and in favour of accepting the world as a complex and varied place, has gained sway in other fields of thought, such as psychiatry/psychoanalysis.

I believe that the electorate and a lot of the politicians agree with this view. I contend that most people consider economic management to be an issue of competence not ideology. Michael McDowell’s line about "left-wing government" did not panic the populace. Nobody apart from commentators and PDs saw a problem with a joint FG / Labour economic platform. What made the difference was FG were not providing a strong enough team.

FF do not see co-location as an ideological issue and most voters don't either. The concern is to get more people treated more quickly and to have more public beds available. If there is a better achievable solution then FF will go with it.

I note a post of a link to an excerpt from Captive State by George Monbiot in another thread ("Green Party and co-location a deal breaker?"). Captive State shows how corporations peddle skewed systems by concerted lobbying and infiltrating their people into government bodies. To my mind such lobbyists rely on false mantras about the market curing all in order to coat their poisonous pills. The way to defeat these peole is not with ideological arguments but with clear analysis of flaws in their logic.

Oaths of allegiance to economic ideology should set alarm bells ringing. I for one am glad that our two main parties are "ideologically flexible" in matters economic. George Monbiot convinced me about super-hospitals and hyper-markets. The fact that the PDs profess an economic ideology and have pushed super-hospitals and co-location concerns me. The public want results not philosophies.

[irishpeoplearewhingers]

Agreed- the only question that matters is whether something works in practice or not. As your fellow Politburo member Deng Xiao Ping might have put it, "Practice is the sole criterion for determining truth".

[certain_people]

I don't know that I agree with you. I don't think economic ideology is considered redundant - I just think the Irish electorate by and large agree with the liberal free-market ideology now supported by pretty much all the mainstream parties. I think that's shown by the demise of Democratic Left and the movement of Labour into the centre. There's not really any room for a socialist party any more, because the electorate doesn't want a socialist government.

[MacCoise]

If it is dead so is a major part of any so-called Irish democracy

[rockyracoon]

Excellent topic imo. First of all, we have the basic argument against the premise that all economic ideology is dead. Having no philosophy is a philosophy. (I'm equating philosophy=ideology). Is the no ideology argument tantamount to laissez-faire economic ideology? Undoubtedly some people will take this line of reasoning. This approach has as many attendant political ramifications as full on marxism.

There is no doubt, though, that economic ideological thinking and theory has been stagnant throughout the 20th/21st century bar of those on the right wing.

[scamallbeag]

I contend that economic ideology is thankfully considered to be of little importance by the Irish electorate....

Oaths of allegiance to economic ideology should set alarm bells ringing.... The public want results not philosophies.

Yes, I remember Marx saying something similar about the Young Hegelians:

"The Young-Hegelian ideologists, in spite of their allegedly "world-shattering" statements, are the staunchest conservatives. The most recent of them have found the correct expression for their activity when they declare they are only fighting against "phrases". They forget, however, that to these phrases they themselves are only opposing other phrases, and that they are in no way combating the real existing world when they are merely combating the phrases of this world...

It has not occurred to any one of these philosophers to inquire into the connection of German philosophy with German reality, the relation of their criticism to their own material surroundings." Marx, The German Ideology, 1845-6.

[Auditor #9]

Interesting thread Zhou.

Was economic ideology ever important/distinctive/prominent in irish politics? and during what periods? or was our attitude to economics a mixture of ideologies or what? because you get the free market theory mixed in with and hampered by protectionism (I'm thinking of Seamus Brennan trying to convince cabinet colleagues to grant Ryanair exclusive use of Stanstead against competition by aer lingus) and a bunch of other 'isms' current in economics as it is practised in this country - clientalism for one.

(sorry for trying to derail Marx there, scamallbeag)

[Xipe Totec]

Economic Ideology - A Dead Concept in Irish Politics??

In Ireland: since I've been aware of Irish politics, pragmatism has always superceeded ideology by parties across the spectrum.

Worldwide: I don't think it's economics but merely the orthodox neo-classical model that's dead. There's a broad range of thought out there that could prove fertile if taken with a more humble approach than the dominant method today.

Regarding what you say about the triumph of non-ideological parties, this trend has been an important trend across the Western world, in countries like the US, Britain, France and others.
Mainstream parties are triangulating their positions about the middle ground in order to capture votes.
This indicates the reaching of concensus on many issues, which I think will be challenged by radical parties/positions in future electoral cycles.

I note a post of a link to an excerpt from Captive State by George Monbiot in another thread ("Green Party and co-location a deal breaker?"). Captive State shows how corporations peddle skewed systems by concerted lobbying and infiltrating their people into government bodies. To my mind such lobbyists rely on false mantras about the market curing all in order to coat their poisonous pills. The way to defeat these peole is not with ideological arguments but with clear analysis of flaws in their logic.

The messages such lobbyists and think-tanks emit are, and always have been, window dressing for powerful corporations to trot out while they manipulate the economic environment to their own ends.

Trying to 'defeat' them by highlighting 'flaws in their logic' is as pointless as chasing shadows.
A better approach is to expose their rent seeking for what it is and to explain why their actions are to the detriment of the majoriy of the population and society as a whole.

[scamallbeag]

Interesting thread Zhou.

Was economic ideology ever important/distinctive/prominent in irish politics? and during what periods? or was our attitude to economics a mixture of ideologies or what? because you get the free market theory mixed in with and hampered by protectionism (I'm thinking of Seamus Brennan trying to convince cabinet colleagues to grant Ryanair exclusive use of Stanstead against competition by aer lingus) and a bunch of other 'isms' current in economics as it is practised in this country - clientalism for one.

(sorry for trying to derail Marx there, scamallbeag)

That's fine -- I'm just trying, step by step, to get people on p.ie to realize that (true) socialists are materialists (not idealists).

I don't think that this country has ever had an economic ideology, no. I honestly don't think it has ever been able to afford to until recently (as someone said on a different thread, we tend to just muddle along). That pretty much accounts for the free market theory mixed in with protectionism, you note. Also the clientelism (and corruption).

In recent years, the government have had more power (read cash) to actually take positive action on a range of issues... there was no harm in fully debating ideas from all sides of the spectrum as to how to use this power (ideally to the benefit of all citizens in the country), but we didn't...

And people and the government are still happy with muddling along -- in economic (though not social) terms, we're only lucky that the EU did impose some economic ideology on us, with the structural funds.

[scamallbeag]

Sorry, just to clarify, I am saying that 'muddling along' is not the same as 'pragmatism'.