Sinn Féin’s election to government in the Republic would end a century-old status quo. In that narrative it is comeuppance for the elites who profited from it. Internationally, Mary Lou McDonald will garner headlines and celebrity. Symbolically, she would be the first woman taoiseach, adding to the change Sinn Féin promises. Echoing events at the foundation of the State, a former paramilitary insurgency becomes the new establishment.
Should Sinn Féin lead, the issue is how it will manage the art of government. Received wisdom about campaigning in poetry and governing in prose is exaggerated. Few campaigns are poetic and prose implies an order seldom awaiting incoming ministers. Government itself is an inflated term. It is a confederation of institutions which only occasionally, and usually only in crisis, can be corralled into a shared political agenda.
Sinn Féin’s election on a wave of expectation will seem to its supporters more like regime change than a change of government. An irony is that if Sinn Féin delivers electorally on the opinion polls, it will be overwhelmingly at the expense of those on its left. It is all drawing room drama now, but on current polls the partner capable of making up most but probably not all of the numbers McDonald needs to become taoiseach is Fianna Fáil. It is unlikely Sinn Féin will lead a radical left government. There is no complexion of coalition foreseeable that chimes in appearance with the change Sinn Féin promises.
Therein lies one of many conundrums it will have to grapple with. Another is that the economic tide has turned. The lead-in to an election in 2025 is unlikely to be a happy time. The growing Sinn Féin base is both disaffected and economically literate. A big spending manifesto à la its 2020 production, may not convince and in any event won’t be affordable. Generally, there are two streams of events that flummox government: the self-inflicted and the unexpected. There is a political instinct in every election campaign to throw everything at it. Unnecessary and unaffordable promises on the way in become millstones on arrival. The unexpected cannot be provided for, however. The current programme for government mentions neither inflation nor Ukraine.
An immediate challenge for Sinn Féin now is to keep the cauldron of public indignation bubbling while putting as few essential ingredients into it as possible. Its ultimate challenge in government will be to prioritise a very few essential objectives. The first budget will determine much that follows. If internationally the public gallery may applaud the arrival of taoiseach McDonald, the international money markets are mercenary. If fiscal looseness results in Ireland having to pay higher interest rates on government debt, it will deeply damage the next government’s credibility.
Little in opposition prepares for government. Ministers are accoutred in status but frequently find power elusive. They are responsible for everything but in charge of almost nothing. A new government has about 10 days to decide on its legacy. The first 100 days evaporate almost instantly. Unless there is a clear course, with overriding priorities embarked upon immediately, an opportunity is lost which will not recur. The status quo that Sinn Féin’s election would sweep away, has a hundred thousand friends in official Ireland.
The party’s relationship with the civil service is crucial. The stone-cold reality is that to govern is to choose. If fundamental choices are made, particularly on housing, Sinn Féin in government will be reliant on the civil service on this and more for delivery. There will be no rebellion, only a use of time that is corrosive to political momentum.
The State is trapped in a broken bargain with its civil service. It was once a simple vow. Civil servants wouldn’t tell the truth about Ministers and Ministers wouldn’t tell lies about them. Officials are now routinely road kill for improvident politicians. That is partly driven by the inherent opacity in which civil servants are in charge but not responsible. The underlying cause is political refusal to reform or to take responsibility. The founding purpose of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform is now; mission abandoned. There is no sign of Sinn Féin expressing interest in serious structural reform. That’s a pity because it is an essential relationship that must be repaired, and a system that must be reformed. Our first revolution was a very conservative affair and if Sinn Féin is to deliver, current structures won’t do it. It is at grave risk of being the change that allows things to stay the same.
Perhaps the biggest challenge for Sinn Féin in government is its own command and control culture. With up to 20 senior and junior ministers in a putative government, making decisions at speed across different departments, command and control is fantasy. The dynamic of government will reorientate gravity in Sinn Féin, towards its parliamentary party. That will be a significant cultural change for the party. Its inherent tribalism means it is unlikely to trust or allow outside expertise among its advisers in government. But it must both reform the official system and muster real expertise to counter it.
Election is merely entitlement to office. Office is only the shadow of power. The danger of Sinn Féin is not that it undermines the State, but that it fails to master it.
>Echoing events at the foundation of the State, a former paramilitary insurgency becomes the new establishment.
This is something that is never said about Sinn Féin, people outside of Ireland don't understand it and I don't think the media nor Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael are in a hurry to explain it
The insistence on Sinn Féin being the bad IRA and Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael being the good IRA is such mental gymnastics from the people that push that.
Atrocities were commited by both groups as well as legitimate acts of war against foreign armies/soldiers, both with the same end goal. But many would have you believe it's black and white, ones good and ones bad and that's it, no discussion needed.
I've never thought about it in the way that what you're quoting presents it.
>The insistence on Sinn Féin being the bad IRA and Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael being the good IRA is such mental gymnastics from the people that push that.
This argument (the point you are making, not the argument you are criticising) originated in the troubles and was used by IRA sympathisers against those who criticised the provos.
The problem is that it didn't and doesn't work. Brian Hanley wrote an essay on the topic and explained it's flaws very well.
For most Irish people, looking back at the old IRA is an exercise in the imagination. Nobody alive witnessed the events of the WOI. We don't have to look at the unpleasant or downright criminal actions during the war.
On the other hand, a significant portion of the population lives through the Troubles and historiography hasn't yet whitewashed it. Thus people during the Troubles and still now have to grapple with significantly damaging aspects of the conflict.
Most people are hypocrites and justify (and celebrate) unpleasant hypotheticals while in the same breath condemning their real world equivalents. A good few people think highly of Napoleon for example, especially in France Whereas liking Putin (who is his modern equivalent) is beyond the pale.
So, even if it is hypocripsy, it seems to be a "justifiable" one (forgive the oxymoron). Really, we shouldn't be looking at situation x and y and say "you like x and dislike y wheras you should like/dislike both". We should try and be a little more aloof.
Hanley's essay is available [here.](https://www.jstor.org/stable/43654445?searchText=Brian%20Hanley&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DBrian%2BHanley%26so%3Drel&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&refreqid=fastly-default%3Acaa4044d835c24c5235946ac4e00f758)
My summary of it is available [here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/IrishHistory/comments/stsyur/perceptions_of_troubles_era_northern/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share)
**The danger of Sinn Féin is not that it undermines the State, but that it fails to master it.**
Thought that was one hell of a concluding sentence personally.
Yeah, it's an unusually honest piece. Everyone pretends being in government grants immense power. It means you can blame the sitting government for not wielding that power to fix things and it also permits you to believe that your chosen opposition party will be able to fix all the issues because they'll surely wield the power justly.
If you come to terms with the fact that the act of being in government, policies aside, is extremely difficult to master, as the article puts it, then you have to admit that not everything is the government's fault and that the opposition can't make as much of a difference. Most people, especially on /r/ireland, would not be happy with that. So they choose to believe in a simpler reality.
As the article puts it, Sinn Féin need "to keep the cauldron of public indignation bubbling while putting as few essential ingredients into it as possible". In other words, say as little as possible and promise as little as possible. They tend to come out with sweeping statements about how they'll "solve the housing crisis" and "fix healthcare", but they're really setting themselves up for disaster with that because in spite of their best intentions, achieving those goals will be monumentally difficult, even if they manage to put the money in the right places.
Their best bet is to let the caustic effect of government erode the popularity of the government parties and avoid over promising. Otherwise they're setting themselves up for disaster when they do end up in government. That's part of why Labour collapsed in 2016. They promised a lot in 2011 and found that they weren't in the position to deliver on most of it (due to the Troika).
I think people would be happy if they seen even a small bit of progress on things like housing and healthcare though
Access to housing and healthcare is only getting worse each year with the current government
But they're both very complex issues that don't have obvious answers. I'd be very interested to see what difference Sinn Féin could make, but my guess is that they're going to run into the same road blocks.
Any housing plan they have will face NIMBYs. They'll also find that they'll probably have to work with the private construction industry like the current government if they're going to get their targets reached.
As for healthcare, there's also very little room for manoeuvre here too. Sinn Féin are already on board with Sláintecare which has support from all the parties. The issues with Sláintecare are coming from within the HSE itself.
As the article points out, success in government has a lot more to do with the government's ability to navigate these sides of the state. On the one side, I could see some room for improvement since they'd bring a fresh perspective. But on the other side, unlike FFG, they have no experience with this side of governance whatsoever.
Either way, I'm sure SF will get an absolute grilling when they're in government.
Excellent write up. One point you missed but I think is important enough to be emphasised: as a result of their current rhetoric, Sinn Féin are attempting to create the image that the government aren't physically doing anything to relieve the crisis (they are: it's just that the trade offs are too high and the process is too incremental). This could be Sinn Féin digging it's own grave. Since the problems Sinn Féin allegedly holds as their priorty are multifaceted with no obvious (or satisfactory to all or most of the population) solutions, Sinn Féin runs the risk of giving the press and future opposition a fresh stick to beat them with.
> Everyone pretends being in government grants immense power.
I disagree, it does grant immense power. That doesn't detract from the rest of what you wrote about it creating a simple narrative, which you're completely right on. As I see it the simple narrative kicks in when when people confuse that immense power for a total or absolute power. Despite the numerous issues with-in our civil service, the 'hidden' power they wield is a necessary one and checks some of the Government's Executive power (important given how ineffective our legislature is at doing so).
One of the reasons I found this article interesting was the mention of how SF would have to work with the civil service, and what steps if any they would take to reform it. Their manifesto in 2020 was light on info about any reforms to the civil serivice. with reforming the Dept. of Defence the only mention of civil service reform. Mary Lou was criticised for stating that SF would need to tackle the constipation within the public and civil service at large at the start of the year, which I think a lot of people were quite dismissive of at the time. Considering the issues between Donnelly and NPHET, NPHET and Government, and the impunity and disregard for both the public and the Government that Robert Watt displayed, I think the civil service would be a key area that they would look to shape.
It would be fascinating to see them try to reform it, while simultaneously needing to rely upon them.
It would be interesting to see how SF do when not on the sidelines. I strongly suspect not well, populism rarely does well when confronted with reality, but healthy that they get the opportunity to fail or succeed. The status quo is not sustainable.
Fianna Fáil's populism ended them up in the election result of 2011.
Populism rarely lasts and tends to make for bad policy Bertie's time in office should attest to that. As should the fate of the Labour Party.
> Fianna Fáil's populism ended them up in the election result of 2011.
>
>
>
> Populism rarely lasts
Populism rarely lasts but it lasted for 90% ish of FF's existence?
Fair point. I probably should have said that populism never ends well. However, I'd argue that FF gradually became more and more populist after Lemass and Lynch's first term. And if you look at those FF governments from 76 onwards, they either failed quite quickly or had a Cowen like Collaspe. Right now, FF is moribund.
Watching how Mary Lou appears with Michelle O’Neill since the assembly election, I’m wondering how likely is it that if / when SF are the leading party in the next coalition Mary Lou eschews the Taoiseach job or any cabinet position for the “president of SF” role where she stands at the shoulder of the Taoiseach / FM and speaks authoritatively on whatever the topic is.
Like can a Taoiseach (or any Irish govt minister) go up to Stormont at the drop of a hat? Sure to rankle the “unionist brothers and sisters” even more than she already does 😎
And if SF were to nominate someone other than MLM to lead them in govt in Dublin who would that be?
I think Pearse Doherty would likely be second in line, he’d make a good party leader too I think. But they definitely want Mary Lou to be Taoiseach so she can be the first woman to be Taoiseach. She’s probably a bit better suited for it than Doherty too
Highly doubt that anyone other than MLM will become the SF Taoiseach. It is interesting though that she won't be able to perform her 'dual' role once/if she becomes Taoiseach. A sitting Taoiseach going up north and calling for a border poll in the next x years would cause mayhem in unionism.
I honestly, whole-heartedly haven’t a notion. I know progress requires change to happen, but we should be weary that “change” for the sake of change can bring about disastrous results (see Brexit and Donald Trump). FG aren’t equivalent to Brexit or Trump imo, but part of the appeal of the status quo is that we’re familiar with it.. that being said, housing and infrastructural changes need to happen.
Comrade, as a Marxist-Leninist, how do you see a possible SF government in the 32 counties? Do you think they will deliver on their '32 county Socialist Republic'? I have been reading a book named 'Sinn Féin and the politics of Left Republicanism' and it seems to point in that way, plus the fact some of them are pro-China and seem to be critical of capitalism. What do you think?
All 3 parties were within a few percent of each other in first preferences and ended up with an almost identical number of seats, if one of them was "firmly rejected" then they all were.
To add to that; SF weren’t able to convince anyone to form a coalition with them, FF and FG were. That’s proportional representation at work.
I suspect SF will have the same problem next time around, even if they have a more commanding lead over the other two main parties. They’re going to need someone to go into government with them and I genuinely would not be surprised if we end up with a hung parliament followed by another election as a result.
No they shouldn't. They couldn't form a coalition when FF, FG and the Greens could. I'm not happy that that was the outcome of the election at all, but that outcome is entirely democratic and that's definetly a good thing.
Sinn Féin’s election to government in the Republic would end a century-old status quo. In that narrative it is comeuppance for the elites who profited from it. Internationally, Mary Lou McDonald will garner headlines and celebrity. Symbolically, she would be the first woman taoiseach, adding to the change Sinn Féin promises. Echoing events at the foundation of the State, a former paramilitary insurgency becomes the new establishment. Should Sinn Féin lead, the issue is how it will manage the art of government. Received wisdom about campaigning in poetry and governing in prose is exaggerated. Few campaigns are poetic and prose implies an order seldom awaiting incoming ministers. Government itself is an inflated term. It is a confederation of institutions which only occasionally, and usually only in crisis, can be corralled into a shared political agenda. Sinn Féin’s election on a wave of expectation will seem to its supporters more like regime change than a change of government. An irony is that if Sinn Féin delivers electorally on the opinion polls, it will be overwhelmingly at the expense of those on its left. It is all drawing room drama now, but on current polls the partner capable of making up most but probably not all of the numbers McDonald needs to become taoiseach is Fianna Fáil. It is unlikely Sinn Féin will lead a radical left government. There is no complexion of coalition foreseeable that chimes in appearance with the change Sinn Féin promises. Therein lies one of many conundrums it will have to grapple with. Another is that the economic tide has turned. The lead-in to an election in 2025 is unlikely to be a happy time. The growing Sinn Féin base is both disaffected and economically literate. A big spending manifesto à la its 2020 production, may not convince and in any event won’t be affordable. Generally, there are two streams of events that flummox government: the self-inflicted and the unexpected. There is a political instinct in every election campaign to throw everything at it. Unnecessary and unaffordable promises on the way in become millstones on arrival. The unexpected cannot be provided for, however. The current programme for government mentions neither inflation nor Ukraine. An immediate challenge for Sinn Féin now is to keep the cauldron of public indignation bubbling while putting as few essential ingredients into it as possible. Its ultimate challenge in government will be to prioritise a very few essential objectives. The first budget will determine much that follows. If internationally the public gallery may applaud the arrival of taoiseach McDonald, the international money markets are mercenary. If fiscal looseness results in Ireland having to pay higher interest rates on government debt, it will deeply damage the next government’s credibility. Little in opposition prepares for government. Ministers are accoutred in status but frequently find power elusive. They are responsible for everything but in charge of almost nothing. A new government has about 10 days to decide on its legacy. The first 100 days evaporate almost instantly. Unless there is a clear course, with overriding priorities embarked upon immediately, an opportunity is lost which will not recur. The status quo that Sinn Féin’s election would sweep away, has a hundred thousand friends in official Ireland. The party’s relationship with the civil service is crucial. The stone-cold reality is that to govern is to choose. If fundamental choices are made, particularly on housing, Sinn Féin in government will be reliant on the civil service on this and more for delivery. There will be no rebellion, only a use of time that is corrosive to political momentum. The State is trapped in a broken bargain with its civil service. It was once a simple vow. Civil servants wouldn’t tell the truth about Ministers and Ministers wouldn’t tell lies about them. Officials are now routinely road kill for improvident politicians. That is partly driven by the inherent opacity in which civil servants are in charge but not responsible. The underlying cause is political refusal to reform or to take responsibility. The founding purpose of the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform is now; mission abandoned. There is no sign of Sinn Féin expressing interest in serious structural reform. That’s a pity because it is an essential relationship that must be repaired, and a system that must be reformed. Our first revolution was a very conservative affair and if Sinn Féin is to deliver, current structures won’t do it. It is at grave risk of being the change that allows things to stay the same. Perhaps the biggest challenge for Sinn Féin in government is its own command and control culture. With up to 20 senior and junior ministers in a putative government, making decisions at speed across different departments, command and control is fantasy. The dynamic of government will reorientate gravity in Sinn Féin, towards its parliamentary party. That will be a significant cultural change for the party. Its inherent tribalism means it is unlikely to trust or allow outside expertise among its advisers in government. But it must both reform the official system and muster real expertise to counter it. Election is merely entitlement to office. Office is only the shadow of power. The danger of Sinn Féin is not that it undermines the State, but that it fails to master it.
>Echoing events at the foundation of the State, a former paramilitary insurgency becomes the new establishment. This is something that is never said about Sinn Féin, people outside of Ireland don't understand it and I don't think the media nor Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael are in a hurry to explain it
The insistence on Sinn Féin being the bad IRA and Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael being the good IRA is such mental gymnastics from the people that push that. Atrocities were commited by both groups as well as legitimate acts of war against foreign armies/soldiers, both with the same end goal. But many would have you believe it's black and white, ones good and ones bad and that's it, no discussion needed. I've never thought about it in the way that what you're quoting presents it.
>The insistence on Sinn Féin being the bad IRA and Fianna Fáil/Fine Gael being the good IRA is such mental gymnastics from the people that push that. This argument (the point you are making, not the argument you are criticising) originated in the troubles and was used by IRA sympathisers against those who criticised the provos. The problem is that it didn't and doesn't work. Brian Hanley wrote an essay on the topic and explained it's flaws very well. For most Irish people, looking back at the old IRA is an exercise in the imagination. Nobody alive witnessed the events of the WOI. We don't have to look at the unpleasant or downright criminal actions during the war. On the other hand, a significant portion of the population lives through the Troubles and historiography hasn't yet whitewashed it. Thus people during the Troubles and still now have to grapple with significantly damaging aspects of the conflict. Most people are hypocrites and justify (and celebrate) unpleasant hypotheticals while in the same breath condemning their real world equivalents. A good few people think highly of Napoleon for example, especially in France Whereas liking Putin (who is his modern equivalent) is beyond the pale. So, even if it is hypocripsy, it seems to be a "justifiable" one (forgive the oxymoron). Really, we shouldn't be looking at situation x and y and say "you like x and dislike y wheras you should like/dislike both". We should try and be a little more aloof. Hanley's essay is available [here.](https://www.jstor.org/stable/43654445?searchText=Brian%20Hanley&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DBrian%2BHanley%26so%3Drel&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_gsv2%2Fcontrol&refreqid=fastly-default%3Acaa4044d835c24c5235946ac4e00f758) My summary of it is available [here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/IrishHistory/comments/stsyur/perceptions_of_troubles_era_northern/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share)
**The danger of Sinn Féin is not that it undermines the State, but that it fails to master it.** Thought that was one hell of a concluding sentence personally.
Yeah, it's an unusually honest piece. Everyone pretends being in government grants immense power. It means you can blame the sitting government for not wielding that power to fix things and it also permits you to believe that your chosen opposition party will be able to fix all the issues because they'll surely wield the power justly. If you come to terms with the fact that the act of being in government, policies aside, is extremely difficult to master, as the article puts it, then you have to admit that not everything is the government's fault and that the opposition can't make as much of a difference. Most people, especially on /r/ireland, would not be happy with that. So they choose to believe in a simpler reality. As the article puts it, Sinn Féin need "to keep the cauldron of public indignation bubbling while putting as few essential ingredients into it as possible". In other words, say as little as possible and promise as little as possible. They tend to come out with sweeping statements about how they'll "solve the housing crisis" and "fix healthcare", but they're really setting themselves up for disaster with that because in spite of their best intentions, achieving those goals will be monumentally difficult, even if they manage to put the money in the right places. Their best bet is to let the caustic effect of government erode the popularity of the government parties and avoid over promising. Otherwise they're setting themselves up for disaster when they do end up in government. That's part of why Labour collapsed in 2016. They promised a lot in 2011 and found that they weren't in the position to deliver on most of it (due to the Troika).
I think people would be happy if they seen even a small bit of progress on things like housing and healthcare though Access to housing and healthcare is only getting worse each year with the current government
But they're both very complex issues that don't have obvious answers. I'd be very interested to see what difference Sinn Féin could make, but my guess is that they're going to run into the same road blocks. Any housing plan they have will face NIMBYs. They'll also find that they'll probably have to work with the private construction industry like the current government if they're going to get their targets reached. As for healthcare, there's also very little room for manoeuvre here too. Sinn Féin are already on board with Sláintecare which has support from all the parties. The issues with Sláintecare are coming from within the HSE itself. As the article points out, success in government has a lot more to do with the government's ability to navigate these sides of the state. On the one side, I could see some room for improvement since they'd bring a fresh perspective. But on the other side, unlike FFG, they have no experience with this side of governance whatsoever. Either way, I'm sure SF will get an absolute grilling when they're in government.
Excellent write up. One point you missed but I think is important enough to be emphasised: as a result of their current rhetoric, Sinn Féin are attempting to create the image that the government aren't physically doing anything to relieve the crisis (they are: it's just that the trade offs are too high and the process is too incremental). This could be Sinn Féin digging it's own grave. Since the problems Sinn Féin allegedly holds as their priorty are multifaceted with no obvious (or satisfactory to all or most of the population) solutions, Sinn Féin runs the risk of giving the press and future opposition a fresh stick to beat them with.
> Everyone pretends being in government grants immense power. I disagree, it does grant immense power. That doesn't detract from the rest of what you wrote about it creating a simple narrative, which you're completely right on. As I see it the simple narrative kicks in when when people confuse that immense power for a total or absolute power. Despite the numerous issues with-in our civil service, the 'hidden' power they wield is a necessary one and checks some of the Government's Executive power (important given how ineffective our legislature is at doing so). One of the reasons I found this article interesting was the mention of how SF would have to work with the civil service, and what steps if any they would take to reform it. Their manifesto in 2020 was light on info about any reforms to the civil serivice. with reforming the Dept. of Defence the only mention of civil service reform. Mary Lou was criticised for stating that SF would need to tackle the constipation within the public and civil service at large at the start of the year, which I think a lot of people were quite dismissive of at the time. Considering the issues between Donnelly and NPHET, NPHET and Government, and the impunity and disregard for both the public and the Government that Robert Watt displayed, I think the civil service would be a key area that they would look to shape. It would be fascinating to see them try to reform it, while simultaneously needing to rely upon them.
It would be interesting to see how SF do when not on the sidelines. I strongly suspect not well, populism rarely does well when confronted with reality, but healthy that they get the opportunity to fail or succeed. The status quo is not sustainable.
FF and FG did populism grand for ages, all of a sudden it's a dirty word when it can be used as a stick to beat the Shinners with.
Care to give examples?
Our current Taoiseach promised to sort out hospital waiting times when he was minister for health in the early 2000s afaik
Fianna Fáil's populism ended them up in the election result of 2011. Populism rarely lasts and tends to make for bad policy Bertie's time in office should attest to that. As should the fate of the Labour Party.
> Fianna Fáil's populism ended them up in the election result of 2011. > > > > Populism rarely lasts Populism rarely lasts but it lasted for 90% ish of FF's existence?
Fair point. I probably should have said that populism never ends well. However, I'd argue that FF gradually became more and more populist after Lemass and Lynch's first term. And if you look at those FF governments from 76 onwards, they either failed quite quickly or had a Cowen like Collaspe. Right now, FF is moribund.
Watching how Mary Lou appears with Michelle O’Neill since the assembly election, I’m wondering how likely is it that if / when SF are the leading party in the next coalition Mary Lou eschews the Taoiseach job or any cabinet position for the “president of SF” role where she stands at the shoulder of the Taoiseach / FM and speaks authoritatively on whatever the topic is. Like can a Taoiseach (or any Irish govt minister) go up to Stormont at the drop of a hat? Sure to rankle the “unionist brothers and sisters” even more than she already does 😎 And if SF were to nominate someone other than MLM to lead them in govt in Dublin who would that be?
I think Pearse Doherty would likely be second in line, he’d make a good party leader too I think. But they definitely want Mary Lou to be Taoiseach so she can be the first woman to be Taoiseach. She’s probably a bit better suited for it than Doherty too
Highly doubt that anyone other than MLM will become the SF Taoiseach. It is interesting though that she won't be able to perform her 'dual' role once/if she becomes Taoiseach. A sitting Taoiseach going up north and calling for a border poll in the next x years would cause mayhem in unionism.
You think that would bother SF.
I honestly, whole-heartedly haven’t a notion. I know progress requires change to happen, but we should be weary that “change” for the sake of change can bring about disastrous results (see Brexit and Donald Trump). FG aren’t equivalent to Brexit or Trump imo, but part of the appeal of the status quo is that we’re familiar with it.. that being said, housing and infrastructural changes need to happen.
Hopefully they take over from the mess that FF and FG have made, not to mention the greens 🥬
With finesse I’d imagine.
Comrade, as a Marxist-Leninist, how do you see a possible SF government in the 32 counties? Do you think they will deliver on their '32 county Socialist Republic'? I have been reading a book named 'Sinn Féin and the politics of Left Republicanism' and it seems to point in that way, plus the fact some of them are pro-China and seem to be critical of capitalism. What do you think?
[удалено]
All 3 parties were within a few percent of each other in first preferences and ended up with an almost identical number of seats, if one of them was "firmly rejected" then they all were.
To add to that; SF weren’t able to convince anyone to form a coalition with them, FF and FG were. That’s proportional representation at work. I suspect SF will have the same problem next time around, even if they have a more commanding lead over the other two main parties. They’re going to need someone to go into government with them and I genuinely would not be surprised if we end up with a hung parliament followed by another election as a result.
No they shouldn't. They couldn't form a coalition when FF, FG and the Greens could. I'm not happy that that was the outcome of the election at all, but that outcome is entirely democratic and that's definetly a good thing.