Extreme Right on RTE

by Michael Kelly-Stone Tue Feb 06, 2024 23:12

What's the odds that these zealots who preach about morality are most likely to be found at
a) brothels
b) gay bars
c) trans clubs

nothing wrong with any of the above, of course, just the hypocrisy of how the zealots think we should live while they absolutely don't.

by sane Tue Nov 07, 2006 20:56

Pinochet was NOT popular with the RC church.

The Pinochet regime persecuted RC clergymen from the hierarchy down who highlighted its 'occasional' human-rights 'shortcomings'. In fact, the RC church was the only effective opposition to General P and his gang.

Whatever shortcomings can be laid at the door of the RC church (and they are many) many of its its clergymen and women have a proud record of opposing fascisism of both the left and right - often by paying the ultimate price. This tradition is not just recent. The hierarchy in Vichy France (with the notable exception of cardinal suhard - who de gaulle would not allow preside over the liberation ceremonies) were the first to publicly denounce the Nazi deportations of French Jews. The moral contrast with the Left is telling - the latter spent decades acting as apologists for the atrocities of Stalin and his minions until.

Excreable commie lick-spits and informers (exposed when the secret-police records were opened after 1990) such as Sean McBride and Claude Cockburn were not fit to tie the boot-laces of the eastern-european RC clergy who opposed oppression and attracted the insults and opprobium of the KGB-friendly duo.

by jeff Tue Nov 07, 2006 16:36

you wrote:

"Distributism again is not facist but based on the Catholic social model (Read her social encyclicals!)which calls for the just and wide distibution of land and wealth as opposed to feudalism and corporate theft."

Yes, thats why Pinochet's Chile was so popular with the Church, as well as just and equitable US corporations.

by Georgie Wed Nov 01, 2006 12:52

Jeff,it seems your reaction to the Hibernian really was quite deeply affecting.Your obviously a delicate chap,suffering from an accute form of "Past Shock",as opposed to future shock,given that the Hibernian,far from a fascist publication,merely harkens back to another era and is still I suspect ,alive and well in the hearts and minds of many folk who don't buy into the "new freedoms" that a society based on ideological nihilism and material centricty,realise are in fact nothing but new shackles, pychological burden and instability.Just look at he figure in this country for depression and suicide.They are going of the scale like never before.Perhaps a holiday is in order,or maybe it's the case that you simply arent up to a decent debate and selling your own ideological stance.

Foaming at the mouth and expressing a spitting indignation really doesnt cut the mustard.

P.s. For all out there.Ireland was never recognised as a Catholic State,get your facts straight.Not that facts or reality are in vogue around here.

This false paradigm of left and right is laughable also.Its a false designation that is simply designed to stifle debate.I hold views that could be considered both left and right of whatever artificial fence people have built for themselves and try to impose on others.It doesnt work,the model doesnt fit the rainbow of attitudes and opinion.Its old and boring and outmoded.Get over it.Change the record.

Every time I come to this site I have to take pinches of salt.It seems the terms fascist and Catholic are interchangeable.Again,this is like some soviet hangover from the 60's.Get with the times.No one wants the Marxist model of abolition of property.It goes against the grain of human need and determination.
The liberal and all encompassing use of the fascist term here is clearly a weak and disengenous tactic to undermine and discredit and has no basis in the real world.

Distributism again is not facist but based on the Catholic social model (Read her social encyclicals!)which calls for the just and wide distibution of land and wealth as opposed to feudalism and corporate theft.

Hamish Fraser,Ex communist secret and convert realised this and wrote erudite and excellent books on the matter.Distributism is the logical and sane way forward.
Marxism is merely a more abhorent concentration of power in the hands of even less accountable and moral men as history has already proven.Read a book,I challenge you!

For all you cowardly hypocrites out there.Go and organise rallies and protests ourside the giant mosque in Clonskea if your that worried about our jolly gay compatriots.There you will find en masse the people you deride so well.

by robot Wed Nov 01, 2006 11:34

"To correct Sean C, I do believe the Hibernian's readership is a little beefier than the small list of those who regularly frequent Indymedia Ireland, or order Searchlight for that matter"

Erm I really really doubt it. Indymedia's readership is about 300,000 a month. Over 500,000 hits a day. We can be fairly sure that more people will look at this particular story than have ever seen a copy of the Hibernian.

by Pedro Tue Oct 31, 2006 22:15

I suspect that his appearance on the Late Late Show had nothing to do with hidden agendas and everything to do with ratings. There's no better ratings winner that allowing somebody with views contrary to mainstream opinion to pontificate on their chosen subject. The same rational applied in reverse in 1985 when Gay Byrne interviewed two lesbian former nuns, despite enormous opposition including protest prayer vigils outside the studio.

I've no time for Mr. O Broin's views but I think we need to guard against becoming a society where those that don't conform to orthodox thought are incapable of having their voice heard. Having a truly liberal outlook involves believing not only in freedoms for yourself but also for everyone else, including those who wish to deny you your freedoms.

The victories of liberal Ireland over those who believed in a monolithic Catholic state will have been very hollow if our only achievement is to change the canon of acceptable thought and behaviour, and to force it on dissenters with all the zeal of Archbishop McQuaid.

by Frank Flynn Tue Oct 31, 2006 21:50 frankflynn2006 at yahoo dot ie

To correct Sean C, I do believe the Hibernian's readership is a little beefier than the small list of those who regularly frequent Indymedia Ireland, or order Searchlight for that matter.

by Frank Flynn Tue Oct 31, 2006 21:44 frankflynn2006 at yahoo dot ie

A ridiculous headline to an equally preposterous article built on nothing but prejudice and far-left nonsense. Since when his holding true to Catholic values being of the "extreme right"? And since you often call for "no platform" for the extreme right, are you people engaging in religious persecution here?

Clearly, this is yet another lame attempt to smear The Hibernian, when questions about Searchlight's shady dealings with the security services and Scott Millar's questionable past (and present) haven't been answered - in fact, that magazine gave this website a good, unanswered hiding in its October issue.

by Up the gays! Tue Oct 31, 2006 21:11

Note that the people espousing 'traditional' morality are not forcing their views on anybody.

When there's free access to abortion, no angelus on the telly, no state subsidy of the Catholic indoctrination institutions (called schools) etc then you can make that claim. Until then you can take your outrage over the veil and sit on it.

Honestly, the standard of comments on indymedia has fallen to the level of the typical bulletin board where people just type any old shite and call it "debate".

by Deirdre Clancy Tue Oct 31, 2006 21:03

I saw some of that debate. There was a very sane and articulate doctor and three others on the panel, two of whom were reasonably sane and articulate, and definitely liberal on sexuality. Then they had this woman lifted straight out of the 1950s Ireland, who was laughable (though rather depressing in close proximity, I'd imagine). The more liberal contributors were the far more articulate and convincing ones. I don't really think RTE has an agenda to give a platform to the right, on this subject matter at least. If it did, it would be soliciting conservative contributors who were far more slick and polished, and wouldn't be outnumbering them by three to one on a panel.

by Joseph Tue Oct 31, 2006 16:00

Even traditionalists have a legitimate right to express their view on marriage. We must be tolerant. I think sodomite is an accurate term but I would not use it myself to homosexuals because I know some of them are hurt by it. I know David Norris isn't. It may be more fitting to use that word about the activity of Catholic priests down the years. If someone uses such a term to hurt and insult then the shame is on them. If they were truly Christian they might not want to cause offence. But I will concede people of dubious psycholigy cling to such right wing groups and perhaps true Christians would also be hurt to be associated with such bigoted views.

We could just as easily suggest that the traditional Irish Catholic view of marriage was knocking up your 14 year old daughter and sending her to a convent. We could suggest it was the priest knockinig up his housekeeper and denying it. We could suggest it was the paedophile priest "sodomising" the sons of his parishoners. We could suggest it was a brutal man raping his wife and children. We could suggest it was no sex at all becuase you unknowingly married a gay man or woman and couldnt leave because of the legal situation and shame.

In short, for many reasons, traditional Catholic marriage is hardly a value to be valued. These right-wing groups posing as Catholics, like Opus Dei have always been with us. Their aims and objectives are politicial and social control and has nothing to do with helping people communicate with God. It is up to Catholics to throw them out if they are to achieve respect and forgiveness for centuries of abuse.

by Frankie Tue Oct 31, 2006 15:45

Some have sought to create the impression that its all bad. Its not. Not all right wing values do I agree with. But at the same time, they are more in line with most people than left wing values.

by Francis Bacon in drag Tue Oct 31, 2006 15:33

1. Entertainment value.
2.The laciviousness of their interest in the sacred feminine anatomy cannot be beat.(or can it)??
3. The ruler and thermometer are most interesting in the bedroom department.
4.The repression of the feminine in the white middle class male leads to overt and interesting
methods of exposure of their pyschopathology.
5.They are a dying breed and they are cracking the whip and making noise.

They probably have the best drugs/porn/cars.

The negative side is that they oppress/harass/dominate and control and if the
girlies stop co-operating they extend their sociopathy into the community and cause
problems.

The porn is generally of the splat nature rather than the enjoyable realm
- they are
innured to war and hurt because they drive it with their bible thumping propensities
and they go to mass- to ask pardon for their immortal souls- though they know
there is no help in them because they have rejected equality.

by omg Tue Oct 31, 2006 14:36

The Catholic church moves in mysterious ways, people seem to forget the clout that they carry in the republic, this sort of stuff fits right in with them, you may find they lend a invisible hand in such things

by insane Tue Oct 31, 2006 14:19

What is traditional catholic sexual morality- the wedding, pregnant blanket, nine month honeymoon,
the cigar in the pub. the nappies on the line?

These weird little men may subscribe to that- bless, but They lobby, they abuse and they
troll too. Thus their weirdeness is not contained and it damages the women who marry the
blackbird of their dreams and find out he has strange ideas like sex whenever he wants, no
menstrual sex(Unclean). The bible under the bed says 'thou shalt' cos I want it- that weird
morality?

Yes they are a dying breed of fuckers- but they have little ones to carry on the fight
and they get national tv coverage.

by sane Tue Oct 31, 2006 13:52

Traditional Catholic sexual-morality (Which this writer does NOT personally subscribe to) is not fascism, of the 'Hiberno' or any other variety.

It is a very quaint and minority point of view nowdays. - But none the less, its proponents have a right to express their odd view that sex is for hetro-sexual marriage only.

Note that the people espousing 'traditional' morality are not forcing their views on anybody. This is in stark contrast to the (male) authority figures in some of our new immigrant communities who believe that, under the 'veil' (pun intended) of so-called ''multiculturalism' they have the right to run a society within a society wherein 'their' women are subjugated and controlled in their lifestyle and social-interaction.

If just half the paranoid outrage as has greeted the 'Hiberno' proponents of the mores of a bygone (and never to be revisited era) was directed against the very real and present danger facing the female members of some of our minority immigrant groups, we might be on our way to halting the vile and invidious plague of 'multiculturalism before it becomes too late.

By the way, RTE is notoriously far more liberal in its views on sexual behaviour than the public it serves.

Finally, much of the comment on this discussion-thread says much about the ideology of the people who believe that minority viewpoints should be censored or suppressed. Perhaps they should be looking for signs of a nascient fascism closer to home.

by anon Tue Oct 31, 2006 11:59

There is a long history of covert state support for all sorts of right wing groups throughout the world. You will generally find that these groups never seem to have a problem getting funding. These groups have many uses, from pushing certain agendas, to promoting extreme views and thereby silencing reasonable voices, to distraction and to intimidation and physical attacks on other groups.

Think of it this way. If the state is aware of Left wing groups of all kinds, then it is going to be equally aware of these far Right wing groups. Since the far right resembles and mirrors the true nature of capitalist power system, the iron fist behind the velvet glove, they accomodate them much more readily so long as the connection remains covert and does not embarass them too much.

by Stuart Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:59

Isn't he simply reflecting the mass Damascene conversion throughout the self-appointed "thinking" class in Irish society? Emily O'Reilly, Vincent Browne, William Reville, Mary MacAleese and a host of others whose names rest on sense have taken to this ideology to varying degrees - and are proud to say so. Let's have more exposure of the extreme of homophobic, nuclear family, Catholic Hiberno-fascism to bounce them off.

by jeff Tue Oct 31, 2006 04:21

I was taken aback somewhat to find that rag on sale in Tower, and found the liberal use of the word 'sodomite' when referring to gays to be repulsive. And, yes, they are fascist, as there were articles on distributionism, and references to 'third positionism' , in the magazine. (Distributionism, incidentally, is some type of convulated economic theory regularly expounded upon by the National Front).

They also have a great reverence for the Archangel Gabriel, which, conicidentally, was the same deity greatly beloved by the Romanian Iron Guard. The Hibernian gave me the creeps, and I wondered why it was on sale in Tower records in the first place. This lead to an argument with myself over speech versus hate speech. (Is it actually illegal to refer to gays as 'sodomites'?) Then I left because I had more important things to do and did not have time to concern myself with the antics of a few disgruntled malcontents based in Co.Louth.

Sean C. does ask an important question though; Why is the state broadcaster allowing disgruntled malcontents from Co.Louth a platform? I remember when Justin Barret came to speak at NUIG two years back; loads of people turned up to support his right to free speech while politley disagreeing with him, others viruently condemned his presence and I got given out to by the dental braces wearing adjudicator for playing a short three second burst of fascist trumpet fanfare when Barret got up to speak. (I was there to laugh at the whole charade.)

The following year, the new chairperson for The Lit and Deb society told me they were bringing Barrret back to speak. Why?, I asked. Controversy, was the reply. I explained to the guy that while free speech is free speech, surely the Lit and Deb could do better than bringing a disgruntled malcontent that nobody ever hears about except when he is invited to appear at events like these, for the sake of controversy? That's simply s*it stirring, and it's not clever.

Barret only came to prominence on a few occasions; in the early nineties as a Youth Defence spokesperson; while the rest of us wanted to modernise the country, he wanted us to be stuck in a Franco like theocracy. His mug made a reappearance during the Nice referendum; Bertie wanted to tarnish the No campaign with the same brush, and he finds quasi fascist Barret taking a role in said campaign. Finally, he made a re-appearance when he was assaulted by a group of anti fascists in UCD (That's not clever behaviour either, people assaulting people, that is.)

If it wasn't for these three examples, nobody would know who Justin Barret is. RTE would want to cultivate a bit more taste than to be using tax payer's money to give this latest bunch of malcontents a unique opportunity to make people aware of their uniquely scatalogical world view. I'm sure if they want to drag a rusty oul' platform on the back of a tractor down from Louth to give a rousing speech to the assembled masses on O'Connell street or Stephen's Green, the Gards will let them.

However, for RTE to provide them with a platform is unacceptable!That's money out of my tv licence!