Eurozone Sovereign Debt Crisis part 2 - Ireland

Photos (11)

Yes but why? We happen to have a system of government which gives supreme power to the prime minister with minimal checks, but i dont see evidence why this should have given stable government. It may be true that a constitution which has built in checks and balances is not the protection it seems, because in the end no constitution defies the will of the people or the politicians to be extreme.

Part of the stability may be because we had a very famous empire, which gave a sense of national unity and contentment as world top dog. Then, we had 50 years dominated by war against Germany, which united the nation wonderfully. The situation now is perhaps the most dangerous it has been throughout that time. There is growing disenchantment in political process and the traditional constitutional checks (house of Lords, monarch) are weaker than they have ever been. Every year we get more 'state control' legislation in the name of fighting terrorism whereas the actual harm being done to this country by terrorists is negligible.

I tend to think the fundamental part of anything is the reality behind it, not the appearance.

There's reference above to the Irish national anthem, A Soldier's Song. This was a popular song from the first few years of the twentieth century which jumped to prominence when it was sung (in English)by the rebels of the 1916 Easter Rising. The Easter Rising is a defining moment in the history of Ireland, when some Irishmen in Dublin took up German arms to fight with German support against the United Kingdom. Some years later A Soldier's Song was adopted as the Irish anthem. It still causes enormous offense to many in Northern Ireland and the wider United Kingdom.

The key words are:

Soldiers are we,
whose lives are pledged to Ireland,
Some have come
from a land beyond the wave,
Sworn to be free,
no more our ancient sireland,
Shall shelter the despot or the slave.

The present vote makes a mockery of the spirit of this anthem. The people of Ireland have voted for an end to key aspects of their sovereignty, in effect for slavery. Irish freedom is over. Ireland as a Free State: 1922-2012. RIP.

After all the pains and tensions of Irish history we now have another cause for grief.


PS - there's a joke that the Irish anthem is usually sung in Irish because the words are too weird. Is "sireland" even in the dictionary? (land of forefathers).

Oh well, as I recall in the New Zealand anthem, "free land (admittedly as two words) is held to rhyme with "Zealand".

Anyway, that's way off-topic. Sorry.

Photos (4)

You may not, but I am sure the Baron himself would acknowledge John Locke as the founder of modern western liberal republicanism, upon which the British system is based from the year, ironically , in which Montesquieu was actually born. All other republican constitutions follow.

As my Grandfather used to say, "If you are going to have a woman, why not have a beautiful one who wants to fuck you."

i did sayd anything against your system, nor do i rate it.
all i say its a monarchy and not a republic. how you treate your monarch is up to you... but still no republic. democracy yes
Datei:Forms of government.svg

also a off topic... but as we discuss "democracy" it fits.

the question is, how democratic is a system, where mutch money is needed to get a high political position. - im talking about the US congress...
250 out of 435 parliamentarians are millioners. 10% are even part of the 1% top earners. and the "Super Pac" is forcing this problem.

Well, I know that the UK feels very special, but I would not say it has a "republican constitution". Anyway, I do not want to damage your enjoyment of the Jubilee. Every nation has its own fetish, we have an abstract idea of our country (the "Helvetia"), you need a person. Enjoy.

"Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall."
"Ruhm liegt nicht darin, niemals zu fallen, sondern jedesmal wieder aufzustehen, wenn wir gescheitert sind."
"La plus grande gloire n'est pas de ne jamais tomber, mais de se relever à chaque chute."
"La vera gloria non consiste nel non cadere mai, bensì nel rialzarsi dopo ogni caduta."
"Nuestra gloria más grande no consiste en no haberse caido nunca, sino en haberse levantado después de cada caída."

Photos (11)

technically we have someone called a monarch and we acknowledge a monarchy. Practically, looking at the list you post,we have something more like a 'republic with an executive president dependant on parliament'. The person in Britain who rules and exercises the powers of eg the US president, plus considerably more, is the the person called the prime minister.

Just as a little example, Jeremy Hunt culture minister just broke the code of conduct for ministers. Pretty clear, he did. However, he can only be called to account for this if the Prime minister agrees to the matter being investigated. He refuses. The prime minister could be overruled, but only by a vote in parliament against him.

its more like... and you could say that...
yes, i totaly confirm. but its quite simple, your head of state is a monarch, so you are a monarchy

you like to take fish-sticks in your mouth? yes. - so you are a gay fish!

Photos (11)

Is that a German joke?

This is just like the debate over the ECB. Jason says they canot do such and such to rescue the euro because according to how the ECB is described, this is not something it does. I say they will do it, whatever they call it when they do. Perhaps the the ECB is technically a monarchy, but do not be surprised when it starts to act like a republic.

not a german joke, out of south park. South Park - Kanye West - Gay Fish.mp4 - YouTube
how some one could act doesnt care... you never did in the past, by this i doubt you will change differently, as long as you are a monachry.
you may have killed a king you didnt like. but who became next head of state? his son, or nephes or brother... thats still a monarchy, even if you kill the king from time to time.

and if you really argue like this, then germany was for the latest 1100 years a republic... cause the kaiser got voted.

The ministerial code as we have it today is essentially a document written by Gordon Brown when he was PM. There was an earlier code (from John Major) and even earlier civil service guidelines, but what we have today is essentially a set of very recently drawn up guidelines. These guidelines are to be interpreted in the light of "seven principles of public life" with the principles over-riding the narrow interpretation of the guidelines.

I don't think Hunt has broken these principles, and therefore even if he has broken guidelines he has not broken the code. They are guidelines for interpretation within the principles, not rules. I think Cameron is factually correct that the ministerial code has not been broken even if guidelines within that code have been broken.

I think the unfortunate aspect of Brown's ministerial code is that 100% of ministers will break the guidelines daily - be they Labour, Conservative, LibDem or anything else. What he created was a control tool where, subject to his whim, he could at any time correctly point out that a minister was guilty of breach of a guideline, assert that it breached a principle, and start an investigation. The ministerial code gives power to the PM. My personal view is that the current ministerial code is both not fit for purpose and potentially dangerous because of the power it gives to one man, the PM. It should be rewritten as a matter of urgency. Transparency probably needs rules rather than guidelines - but rules have to be based in the reality of the world we live in. For example the concept that a minister can be accountable for the actions of all civil servants in a department is ludicrous and should go.

It may be that Cameron's job this summer will be to get the ministerial code revised. It needs civil service input to do this but as far as I can see is simply issued by the PM (who appoints and fires ministers) so would not go before parliament.

Photos (11)

Jase, My understanding is that the current code was in fact revised and confirmed by the current prime minister, cameron, so if its pointless or wrong, it was he who created the problem by promoting it. Hunt is not accused of losing control of some nameless civil servant is his department, but of his personal adviser hand picked by himself. Hunt claims the man went off and told Rupert Murdoch restricted information about what was happening inside the department without permission. No one else can see how such an adviser could possibly do anything of the sort without the instructions of his boss. If he did, it was Hunt who chose him and placed such an unsuitable person in a sensitive position.

The test is whether the kaiser has real power. Kaiser Wilhelm did have power. His grandmother, Queen Victoria, did not. Which is quite perverse considering how jealous he was.

it sint important if the HoS has power or not.
germany is today a republic. the HoS president gauck has no power.
the usa is a republic. the HoS president obama has power.
britain is a monarchy. the HoS queen elisabeth has no power.

why is germany comparet to the usa a republic and britain not, both have a powerless HoS.cause germany votes for his HoS, same as the USA. britain doesnt

Vaguely on topic:

* The chatter is all that Grexit will happen.
* Berlusconi has today said that Italy will leave the euro if the ECB doesn't print money to give to Italy (ie Eurobonds) - then he said this was a joke.
* Bank of England and Lloyds of London have announced that plans for euro collapse are in place.
* Spanish economy has unsustainable debt and a bank crisis, bonds 6.7%
* President of Cyprus has said that Cyprus will need a bailout
* EZ stock markets have been very badly hit in last few days.

This is all pretty amazing stuff. I think we're looking at euro and EU collapse and a great depression.