I disagree with both you and Gerry as you are both expressing partionist views.
The next President should be the best person for the job regardless of age, sex, home town etc.
If Gerry was to leave in the morning my choice would be for Conor Murphy.
I believe that Pearse Doherty could be an excellent leader of Sinn Féin but not for a good 10 years yet.
Chris:
I feel that for the benefit of the party the next president must be from the 6 Counties. There are one or two from the 26 that would consider themselves candidates that I would not let near the presidency with a forty foot barge pole.
Ferris and Doherty are more than capable, Morgan would be acceptable in my books but beyond them and our current TDs I would be stretched to consider anyone else. We are all aware of the current state of the party in Dublin. Imagine Chris if these were the people that were leading the party?
SF has rose to prominence in the 6 Co's. Surly the next president should be a seasoned member from the 6 Co's who was part and parcel of our rise to power?
Furthermore Chris you have failed to explain the incompetence and ineptitude of those other 'republican' parties that have leaderships in the 26 Co's!
"Chris:
I feel that for the benefit of the party the next president must be from the 6 Counties."
That kind of partitionist mentality has no place in Sinn Féin and is just as disgusting as the suggestion that the next leader must be from the 26 counties.
For the good of the party and the struggle the next leader must be the best person for the job.
I am an Irish Republican, so long as the next leader is from Ireland I don't really care where abouts that may be.
"There are one or two from the 26 that would consider themselves candidates that I would not let near the presidency with a forty foot barge pole."
If it's the same one or two that I am thinking of then I would agree with you that said the same applies to one or two of our northern comrades as well.
The Ard Fheis will decide on the next leader of Sinn Féin, not that there will be a vacancy for a while yet. I’m happy enough with that.
"Imagine Chris if these were the people that were leading the party?"
You seem to have no idea how Sinn Féin is governed.
The President is but one position on the Ard Chomhairle. The rest of the officer board and other members bring the membership up to 47 voting members.
If someone from Tipp was elected as President it in no way suggests that Tipp would be leading the struggle.
The AC is made up of those elected at the Ard Fheis, Cúige delegates, NERC reps etc
A little read of the Sinn Féin constitution once in a while would do you the world of good.
"SF has rose to prominence in the 6 Co's. Surly the next president should be a seasoned member from the 6 Co's who was part and parcel of our rise to power?"
It's that kind of dogmatic Northern arrogance that was a contributing factor to our electoral performance last year.
Sinn Féin is in a prominent position in the 6 counties but a UI will be won and lost in the 26 counties.
I am a member of a 32 county socialist republican party; I have no time for partitionists of what ever kind!
"Furthermore Chris you have failed to explain the incompetence and ineptitude of those other 'republican' parties that have leaderships in the 26 Co's!"
That's like asking me to explain why milk turns sour when pasteurised in the south.
It's a non sequitur argument.
The reason those other parties are incompetent has nothing to do with a southern based leadership.
Chris:
"not that there will be a vacancy for a while yet. I’m happy enough with that."
At least that is one aspect we can agree on. Adams has done a tremendous job in testing and difficult situations thus far. Lesser leaders like O Bradaigh or Francie Mackey would not have the mettle and would have crumbled. Where are these two now by the way?
"That kind of partitionist mentality has no place in Sinn Féin and is just as disgusting as the suggestion that the next leader must be from the 26 counties."
NO IT IS NOT PARTITIONIST. I am merely stating that I prefer the next president to be from the 6 co's as any other group with a 26 co ledership have gone to fuck. Are you disagreeing with this fact?
Furthermore I am aware of the rules that govern SF and the various tiers within the party. Perhaps you can explain why a region that holds over 60% of the party membership should not be the place the next leader ius from. Indeed perhaps you can explain how the 6 co's with a majority of members is not proportionatley represented on the AC Chris?
"NO IT IS NOT PARTITIONIST"
Of course it is, we are an Irish Republican party yet you argue that the next president should be from the 6 counties.
As if coming from the 6 counties qualifies you for anything!
The fact that you fail to recognise such a belief as partitionist is the most worrying part.
"I am merely stating that I prefer the next president to be from the 6 co's as any other group with a 26 co ledership have gone to fuck. Are you disagreeing with this fact?"
You are making a non sequitur argument, those other groups have fallen to the side but the fact that they have a southern leadership has nothing to do with it.
"Furthermore I am aware of the rules that govern SF and the various tiers within the party."
Your previous comments suggest otherwise.
"Perhaps you can explain why a region that holds over 60% of the party membership should not be the place the next leader ius from."
Simple, you choose a leader on the basis of merit not which county they come from.
"Indeed perhaps you can explain how the 6 co's with a majority of members is not proportionatley represented on the AC Chris?"
Of course it is, that is a bullshit argument perpetuated by some of our northern comrades.
Care to check through the membership of the Ard Chomhairle and see where people are from?
Ulster has more than 60% of the representation on the AC.
Chris:
"Of course it is, that is a bullshit argument perpetuated by some of our northern comrades."
Now who is being partitionist?
"
Care to check through the membership of the Ard Chomhairle and see where people are from?"
SF has at most 9 Northern members on the AC - Adams, O Hare,Quinn, Mc Elduff, de Brun, Mc Ardle, Kelly, Glenholmes and Kearney. There are 19 members of the AC chris. Hardly proportionate to the membership in the North Chris?
"
You are making a non sequitur argument, those other groups have fallen to the side but the fact that they have a southern leadership has nothing to do with it."
This is nonsense Chris. Are you suggesting it is mere coincidence. The Southern elements in pre-split SF were not progressive. This is fact not opinion. Just look at where they are now Chris.
Furthermore Chris if someone from Dromintee was up against someone from the 26 co's Im sure you would cast your vote in relation to where the candidates are from. Btw does your belief of best person regardless of place of residence extend to Cuige and CC?
"SF has at most 9 Northern members on the AC - Adams, O Hare,Quinn, Mc Elduff, de Brun, Mc Ardle, Kelly, Glenholmes and Kearney. There are 19 members of the AC chris. Hardly proportionate to the membership in the North Chris?"
LOL, what utter nonsense! There are 47 voting members on the AC. Ulster, which holds 60% of the party membership, has more than 60% of the positions.
"This is nonsense Chris. Are you suggesting it is mere coincidence."
I'm suggesting that you are ignoring the white elephant in the room in each case and seeing what you want to see.
"The Southern elements in pre-split SF were not progressive."
Nonsense, there were elements of pre-split Sinn Féin from the North who weren't progressive either. Also it was only some elements namely the southern leadership, not the entire southern membership.
You lack finesse when dealing with political matters.
"Furthermore Chris if someone from Dromintee was up against someone from the 26 co's Im sure you would cast your vote in relation to where the candidates are from"
No I wouldn't, I would go for the best person regardless of the area they are from.
"Btw does your belief of best person regardless of place of residence extend to Cuige and CC?"
Of course
Chris:
"LOL, what utter nonsense! There are 47 voting members on the AC. Ulster, which holds 60% of the party membership, has more than 60% of the positions."
No no no Chris. The SF website itself refers to a 19 person leadership. 9 of the 19 are from the 6 co's. Perhaps you have difficulty with Maths Chris but 9 is not 60% of 19.
" Also it was only some elements namely the southern leadership, not the entire southern membership."
My point exactly Chris. I never mentioned the southren membership, indeed I acknowledge their contribution, but here you have admitted what a southren leadership had done to pre-split SF. You have simply reinforced my point Chris!!!!!
"No no no Chris. The SF website itself refers to a 19 person leadership."
LOL, since when as a Republican did the Sinn Féin website become your basis of authority.
Rule 6.2.1 of the Sinn Féin constitution, the only authority on Sinn Fein matters, covers membership of the Ard Chomhairle.
I suggest you read it and then come back and apologise.
"from the 6 co's"
And what has that got to do with the price of turnips?
You said
"..explain why a region that holds over 60% of the party membership.."
The region you mentioned is Cúige Uladh, which includes Cavan, Donegal and Monaghan.
The 6 counties is not an operational structure within Sinn Féin.
You are in serious need of education when it comes to the Sinn Féin structures
"but 9 is not 60% of 19."
I never said it was
In relation to you last point, they were individuals. You are now trying to label our entire current Southern Sinn Féin membership with the pre-split one.
That is disgraceful!
"Not to adopt a partitionist mentality, but I must admit that I am a staunch advocate of having the presidency reside with someone from the 6 counties."
Yet 3 after someone suggests the same thing("I feel that for the benefit of the party the next president must be from the 6 Counties."):
your response-"That kind of partitionist mentality has no place in Sinn Féin and is just as disgusting as the suggestion that the next leader must be from the 26 counties."
So, by being a strong advocate of a northern candidate, you have a paritionist mentality and find yourself disgusting?
Or, is it because he used the word "must" that he differs so much from you?
I'm sure that is going to be the jist of your argument, and may be valid, but I think you may have a partitionist mentality and not even realize it.
In any event, does it really matter where the next one comes from? Partition won't end for another 15 years at least.
One [of many] reasons, the Adams generation failed to reunite the Irish nation was they did not have the political muscle in the south, instead in the end they had to go cap in hand to FF and the end result was the GFA. Which must be an unsatisfactory deal by any republicans standards.
I am not placing blame or casting aspersions and I recognize ending the war was the correct thing to do.
One of the reason SF did so poorly in the last southern general election was that Gerry was not up to speed with southern politics, he himself recognized this fact by not standing down there for office. This is not a shortcoming on Adams part for he is a very busy man; and has spent his whole life being closely involved with politics etc in the north and one man can only keep so many balls in the air.
With the ending of the war, the north will become less and less important as far as reunification is concerned and the south more important. For the only way Ireland will be reunited is by political means and for that to happen SF must build up mass support for it amongst the RoI electorate; and say what you will, this can only be done from the south.
Indeed the whole central focus of SF needs to move south or you will just remain a regional party with ministers in a democracy lite parliament, in which the British set the agenda by picking up the tab.
SF needs to set Irelands new political agenda if it is going to move forward and this cannot be done from the north.
To conclude I am not having a pop at your party just giving my opinion.
Comradely regards.
earnan
What are you on about?
Comrades, from where I am sitting, the "radical, revolutionary cutting edge" of the party doesn't appear to be in the Six Counties.
Wednesday, it doesn't appear because it doesn't exist there! 
Does it exist anywhere?
Yeah Chris, in Drogheda 
Seriously though, I think unfortunately the more radical elements of the party are dispersed within the 26 - that certainly isn't to take away from the good work comrades in the 6 do though..
We must have a very different idea about what makes someone radical compared to just plain unrealistic.
Does it exist anywhere?
From an outsiders point of view, I don't believe it does. There are comrades in the 26 of massive integrity who are true socialists and true radicals. Daithi Doolan is one of these, IMO.
But SF ceased to be a radical force a long time ago. What is needed is a campaining grassroots party/alliance, not a party who does u-turns on important policy areas the week before an election in an effort to make themselves more suitable for coalition with a pack of corrupt gangsters like FF.
JG
It's my belief that we have radical and progressive people all over the country.
In relation to your third paragraph I agree 100%
That's fair enough, Chris. My knowledge is limited. But do you think the party is sufficiently democratic? If you really do have radical and progressive people all over the country are their views being reflected in party policy?
JG
It's my view that you can never have enough democracy in a political party.
I do believe that their views are being reflected in party policy.
JG,
I definitely agree with you. I would just clarify something though on the policy u-turn...
Despite what certain members said or did in media that indicated that there may have been a chan in policy, officially -due to the party consitution- these changes could not have been made at anything other than an Ard Fheis. So the original policies still stand - and always did.
In saying that I'm not defending the way it was handled or dealt with or those who felt that it was ok to be vague or inconsistent on very important policy issues. It was f*ckin stupid. But in fairness I raised my concerns (in a less profane way) and was listened to.
Chris:
I am merely advocating that the SF presidency remains in the 6 co's. That does not make me partitionist. If I said that I would like the next president to be from S Armagh, does that mean that I ma effectively partitioning of the rest of the country? I prefer a 6 co leader for reasons already outlined Chris. We do need to build in the South, of that I am well aware, but we can do that by profiling people in the 26 co's. However that by no sttretch of the imagination means the president needs to come from the 26 co's. By the same reasoning I could argue that SF needs to strengthen itself in the Strangford constituency so therefore the next president should be from Strangford?
As regards Ogra they are active in many parts of the 26co's. They surely have a role to play in developing a leadership in the 26 co's However Chris would you be happy if a certain 99% charachter got the reigns of presidency???
"In relation to you last point, they were individuals. You are now trying to label our entire current Southern Sinn Féin membership with the pre-split one.
That is disgraceful!"
No no Chris. I merely pointed out previously the ineptitude of successive 26 co leaderships. I never mentioned the membership from the 26 cos. You intrioduced the membership into the debate not me. In the same post you pointed out the ineptitude of the 26 co leadership. I merely stated that this reinforced my point. i never made any mention of the party membership of the 26 co never mind allign them with anyone. Please tell me how, pointing out that you had by virtue of pointing out the incompetence of the 26 co leadership, had accepted my argument, that I had now insulted the 26 co leadership. This is a cheap shot Chris, and is really irrelevant in the debate. I feel you are trying to divert attention away from your acceptance of my argumen!
Meeawe! Saucer of milk anyone?
I've noticed nobody has mentioned Mary Lou. I've never been able to figure out why she was elevated so quickly. For me she is useless in debates and has that *I don't quite know what's going on* look on her face almost permanently. I saw her in town the other day and she had that face on her!
"I am merely advocating that the SF presidency remains in the 6 co's. That does not make me partitionist"
Of course it does and it's the exact same as blue-shirts arguing that only citiens in the 26 counties should vote for the Irish President.
"However that by no sttretch of the imagination means the president needs to come from the 26 co's."
I never said it did. Unlike yourself and Gerry I don't have a partitionist line on this issue, I believe that the next person should be the best person for the job regardless of where they come from.
"Chris would you be happy if a certain 99% charachter got the reigns of presidency???"
99% is a fucking idiot, the fact that he resides in the 26 counties has nothing to do with it.
In relation to your remarks about Southern Leadership, that leadership was a disgrace because of their politics not their postcode.
That is something which you fail to realise.
JG,
I believe Mary Lou is a very capable and competent speaker and that's been proven over the course of debates on Lisbon that she's been involved in....It's a shame she doesn't get the coverage deserved for them. In particular her debate against EU Commissioner Peter Sutherland....
As for the presidency argument, I think that should be decided on merit - where someone resides is irrelevant. Whatever problems people have with 26 Co. leadership figures, branding everyone the same is not helpful and a stringent 6 Co. only position is inherently partitionist as far as I can see.
Steph
I agree 100%
Chris:
"In relation to your remarks about Southern Leadership, that leadership was a disgrace because of their politics not their postcode."
Your half right Chris, but you overlook the fact that their politics were due to their postcode. They towed a failed political line that at the time was endemic of the 26 co's. Any southren leadership of any 'republican' group has never been progressive. Pre split SF, RSF 32CSC,Sticks, Irps. All were southren leaderships and all done fuck all for the republican cause. I am not saying that there are not valued and trustworthy comrades in the 26 co's I merely feel that it would be advantageous if the bastion of power resided in the 6 co's. At the end of the day the current Northern leadership carried the struggle for over 30 years, this is in stark contrast to the inactivity of so called southren leaderships.
"you overlook the fact that their politics were due to their postcode"
No it wasn't because many in the North followed the Southern Leadership line and many in the South supported the northern provisional line.
It's not as simple as saying south bad, north good.
As Irish Republicans we have to advance the struggle for National Unity and Independence, that can't happen when you advocate partitionist agendas.
"I merely feel that it would be advantageous if the bastion of power resided in the 6 co's"
That's where we have to disagree, there is a great danger in your sort of Northern centred attitude being adopted, and I feel it would be detrimental to the struggle.
I judge people on what they are, not where they are from.
Chris:
"No it wasn't because many in the North followed the Southern Leadership line"
Yes and this was due to the lies peddled by a SOUTHREN LEADERSHIP. This debate does not concern the SOUTHREN MERMBERSHIP. Your point above underlines what I have been arguing all along about the perils of a 26 co leadership. The leadership in question held back the progressive elements within the movement. The Stickie 26 co leadership would still have us stuck firmly under the Unionist Jackboot, whislt O Bradaigh, Des Long et al would have us all fighting another border campaign. This is demonstrative of the mentality harboured by past 26 co leaderships. Please outline for me one successful republican group that has or had a 26 co leadersip? There is none Chris and surely this further illustartes my point Chris?
sf leader they wont need one people wont forgive, brits rule,spot the brit
Commenting by HaloScan
