Talk:Fianna Fáil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Ireland on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Top This article has been rated as top-importance on the priority scale.


Contents

[edit] Election box metadata

This article contains some sub-pages that hold metadata about this subject. This metadata is used by the Election box templates to display the color of the party and its name in Election candidate and results tables.

These links provide easy access to this meta data:


[edit] Discussion

Thanks for your hard work. These pages are becoming very useful and interesting. Could you give us a pronunciation guide? DanKeshet

Thanks for your improvements. Can you please tell us what Fianna Fáil means? Champions of what? -- Anon.

Fianna Fáil is the Irish for 'Soldiers Of Destiny' and does not have anything to do with champions

To say Fianna Fáil is "allied with Italy's "post-Fascist" Alleanza Nazionale" is extremely innaccurate. Both parties happen to be in the same parliamentry group. To state in the heading of a purposedly neutral article about an organisation that they are allied with an organisation described as "post fascist" is extremely misleading and smacks of bias.

I agree, the comment is misleading, and shows clear bias. Perhaps something like "It is in the Union for a Europe of Nations grouping in the European Parliament." is more appropriate? Joolz 00:31, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Possibly POV edits

Someone with knowledge should look at the edits made by User:Wolfsangel. They look rather POV to me, but I don't know enough about Irish politics to tell whether they are correct or not. /Nicke L 21:20, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Trust me, if you knew what really goes on in Irish politics you would not condsider my edits POV. Some of the things Fianna Fail are doing in this country are a joke, but I refrained from adding them to the article as it would definitely be seen as biased. --Wolfsangel 15:09, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Six Counties

I am not Irish, and I'm not politically motivated. I looked into this after noting the edit war. It seems POV to fail to include at least one reference to the term "Six Counties". Yes, that term is POV, and so is "Northern Ireland". Wikipedia:Neutral point of view states : "Articles should be written without bias, representing all views fairly."

Since this article is one about a Republican party, inclusion of their term for that region is appropriate and neutral. The wikilink itself should not mislead, though, so I've added the Six Counties as a paranthetical note only.

I am surprised that this issue, while going on for days, was not discussed here on Talk until now. -- Netoholic @ 18:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

The disagreement has actually been going on for some time and over a wide variety of articles, and in particular discussed at great lenght here [1]. Whilst I agree that a term like "six counties" is not always inappropriate a large part of Irish articles were defaced by a single user (who was essentially a professional vandal and took unilateral action on an unprecidented scale) using it as a substitute for Northern Ireland - and in many cases not referring to Northern Ireland at all and even arguing that Northern Ireland is an inaccurate and pov term. This is largely the reason for the revert war as many wikipedians who took part, many not Irish themselves, took exception to this sort of act on wikipedia. Northern Ireland has a great many unofficial terms and many of these are agenda driven by either side of the nationalist, republican, unionist and loyalist divide. If we conclude "six counties" is a valid term then in other articles their may a precident for other pov terms to represent other agendas - and inviting ourselfs to be held random in each such issue - wikipedia should not be a political mouth piece for anyone. Djegan 18:37, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
What happens on other articles shouldn't make for an edit war here. I think it is a fair thing that, in this article about a Republican party, that we should at least mention the term they use. I would give preference to Northern Ireland for linking purposes, but it is POV to fail to include the other viewpoint. NPOV policy does not say to remove POV... it means to balance points of view neutrally. I do not endorse Lapsed Pacifist's actions, as I think he was going to heavily about it. Wikipedia should, rightly, use the primary term of "Northern Ireland", but also mention the nationalist, republican, unionist and loyalist terms where they apply. -- Netoholic @ 18:44, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Fianna Fáil do not use the term "six counties" [2] [3]. Demiurge 19:06, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Also, there seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about the NPOV principle. It does not mean that Wikipedia should be "equally biased in both directions". It does not mean that 50% of Wikipedia articles should refer to the USA as "the Great Satan" and the other 50% should refer to it as "land of the free and home of the brave". Wikipedia should describe both of these viewpoints, yes (just as the Northern Ireland/Ulster/Six Counties issue is described on the Northern Ireland page). But it should use the official name in all other contexts. Demiurge 19:58, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Our article on Northern Ireland states that Republican groups refer to the region as "The Six Counties". Independantly, I have found that the term is associated with Fianna Fial, though perhaps not as a primary means. My edit reflected this by making "six counties" a parenthetical note only, in a single location. You'll find the phrase used quite frequently in Irish republicanism, as well. Your "Google results" are not sufficient in my mind, and I feel like you're using it to justify your preference towards enforcing your idea.
I am very disappointed that you knee-jerk reverted the change I made, even after I explained that, as an outside researcher, I feel the term makes the article more neutral. I think you have a specific agenda with regards to this issue. It won't do much for me to argue or revert-your-revert ad nauseum, so I'll decline for now. I am only responding because I protest your actions. Even if the article is not perfect in your minds, realize that it's OK for it to be imperfect for a little while. I think both Djegan and Demiurge need to learn to cooperate here, or risk the sort of small-thinking that has lead to the conflict of Ireland itself. Your histories on these related pages shows that you both tend to revert without, and in spite of, on-going discussions.
As I said above, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view states : "Articles should be written without bias, representing all views fairly." I am marking this article with the NPOV template because I believe it is non-neutral to leave out such a short, simple reference in this article. Whether Wikipedia, somewhere somehow, covers the issue of naming, the point is that this article must be NPOV. -- Netoholic @ 20:44, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Sorry you're quite wrong there, as the link above suggests ample discussion was given about this topic - for one person to fleet in a suggest otherwise is a bit rich. The user we were reverting against has been given several 3RR warning and is currently blocked for his revert war. This is not the only page that he was involved in a revert war, look at the history section and you will see that several editors were involved, to suggest some sort of vast right wing conspiracy by two editors is absurd. Djegan 20:50, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
The use of an NPOV term in Irish republicanism does not justify its use here. And "Six Counties" is not a term used by Fianna Fáil, as I have demonstrated. I have produced evidence to support my argument, where's yours? (As for my "agenda" you'll see from my edit history that I have reverted anti-republican/pro-unionist POV as well [4] [5])Demiurge 20:54, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Alright then, evidence. In our article on Jack Lynch, leader of this group from 1966-1979, there is text of a speech in the Northern Ireland section where he uses the term several times. I consider that a very good reason that at least some, minimal, reference to the term is appropriate in this article. -- Netoholic @ 22:10, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I am astonished any credible Wikipedian would suggest we use "Six Counties". The bottom line is we can't. Both communities in Northern Ireland have their own POV language. If either side's language is used, the article immediately becomes POV and infuriates the other community. We cannot use Six Counties anymore than we can use Ulster, the North or the Occupied Six Counties. Any such usage is POV and guaranteed to cause endless edit wars and offence to one or other community. The only neutral term available is the official name of the Northern state, Northern Ireland. It is used by all sides. It is used by the Irish and British parliaments in law. It is the legally registered name with the UN. So it and it alone avoids pushing the agenda of either community. Any attempt to use the exclusive language of either community is correctly reverted on sight. Putting in the preferred nomenclature of either community would be the equivalent in POV terms of using George W. Bush, mass murderer of Iraqis in an article. Because it is by definition POV it is an not an option under Wikipedia rules.

And knowing from personal experience of both sides in Northern Ireland, you'd have to use an equal number of each side's POV terms, or else they'd start whining "how come they got three Six Counties and we only got two Ulsters?" "How come their Ulster got paragraph two and our Six Counties only got into paragraph three. (And yes they are that petty. Sinn Féin and the UUP rowed once over how many photographs of their leaders appeared in one day's coverage of the Belfast Agreement negotiations!!!)

It is also completely irrelevant that in the past FF used Six Counties. They have long banned senior figures from using the term because of its offensiveness to unionists and many nationalists. FearÉIREANNImage:Ireland coa.png\(caint) 22:19, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't endorse using "Six Counties" everywhere Northern Ireland is mentioned. I think that it is appropriate to minimally mention that it is a term used by at least some memebers of this group. If this were an article about a group that prefers "Ulster", then that mention would be appropriate. NPOV fails if the article does not present all sides. A balanced way, in my mind, is the simple paranthetical mention in the intro of this page. To fail to provide information which could be of help to a reader is a disservice. -- Netoholic @ 22:31, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
If you feel it's relevant enough, feel free to add a short paragraph about the previous use of the term "six counties" by FF, and explain why and when they stopped using it, what they call it now, and how this all fits into the bigger picture of FF policy towards Northern Ireland since 1926. Don't just include the term "six counties" by itself without explaining its POV. Demiurge 22:51, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
I think the use of the term is a fascinating insight into the conflict and the views of the various sides. As I said, I am approaching this from a largely outside perspective. I hoped my variation would at least balance both sides of the recent edit war. If adding more text and information about the phrase is called for, I think it would make the article better and reflect the point-of-view of the party, thereby fulfilling the NPOV guidelines for this article. -- Netoholic @ 23:14, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
Off you go then, write some content that is informative, relevant, non-trivial and isn't just an excuse to insert the magic words "six counties" into the article. Demiurge 23:54, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

An outside view as a non-FF'er. I don't think the term "Six Counties" should be used anywhere, as the term itself is inherently POV. --Kiand 23:16, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Removing mention of its use by this political party is a disservice - I cited a reliable source up above where a party leader used this in a speech many times. Articles should describe all viewpoints in a balanced way. Failing to do that is what fails WP:NPOV in this case. -- Netoholic @ 23:24, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

As their is a disagreement, but not a major one, I have added in a new template that invites comment on the disagreement here. It simply calls what is happening a disagreement rather than use emotive terms like POV on the major page.

Re the above - Lynch used the term Six Counties in the 1960s. It was used as late as the 1980s but is now banned in the party as provocative. As the party does not currently use the term, and has not since Haughey's era, and as the new cumann was only set up under Ahern's leadership, it would be patiently wrong to use Six Counties in that context. And I reassert my original point: Six Counties is a provocative, one-sided term guaranteed to give the article a tone that suggests a republican bias. No article here should have either a republican, a nationalist, a unionist or a loyalist bias, either real, perceived or implicit, in content or language. In Northern Ireland, the slightest perception of that's biased against us by any one side will produce a major edit war. That is why we can only use neutral official terms like Northern Ireland. FearÉIREANNImage:Ireland coa.png\(caint) 23:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Some editors have mentioned that the term "six counties" was used in the past by Fianna Fail people and that this should be reason for inclusion of the term in the article. Whilst this may be a valid reason for its inclusion in a controversy/scandal section it is certainly not an appropriate term as a de-facto name for Northern Ireland wholesale. Based on past experience one person attempted to have unlimited licence for the gradual transformation of many wikipedia articles to six counties because of "context" (in many cases it was no such thing and simply a pov agenda) - this is why I have fiercely resisted such use of the term until now and intend to continue so. Agenda driven terms must be limited to relevant specific sections and quotes and not opening paragraphs or general sections. Their is an excellent parody of wikipedia at www.uncyclopedia.org and if people dont subscribe to wikipedia policies and standards then this is the place for them. Djegan 18:14, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] corruption

While this article is subject to 'disagreement', perhaps we might take a look at the corruption section as well. It seems to me to be possible over-emphasised. I toned down some of the highly POV content but maybe JTD you might like to have a go at it as well - see what you think fits or doesn't?Palmiro 11:27, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't feel that the corruption section was over-emphasised; the items contained prior to the edits of Palmiro were not intended to be POV, as they represent solid and undisputed fact, and did not favour any opinions on either side of the Irish political spectrum. --Wolfsangel 18:28, 6 August 2005 (UTC)


I think that someone should look into the statemetn that Liam Lawlor and Ray Burke "even have contact with each other inside the prison". It is my belief whilst Lawlor has served a prison sentence and Burke is currently serving one the two were never incarcerated at the same time. Am I right?


Good point. I think the overlap was only something like three or four days, anyway. My mistake. --Wolfsangel 17:03, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Why is Fianna Fail singled out for a section of its article devoted to corruption? Is this not POV? Are corruption pieces forthcoming for Fine Gael, Sinn Féin or the PDs? TheGeneral1 13:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

We are not going to remove the corruption section just because other irish political party articles do not have a corruption section - by all means if you can add a sustainable corruption section to other articles that is your perogative. NPOV does not mean wholesale removal or censorship of a section nor does it mean a standardised layout and format for particular classes of article. Djegan 17:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

RE: Corruption I think this a good article. I disagree with the view that there is an over emphasis on the corruption part. In fact what Fianna Fail is best known for is corruption. They actually have no control over the corrupt little deals going on at the bottom level of local government. (Planning permission, etc.). It is a well held belief among the Irish urban populous that Fianna Fail's greatest failing is their lack of ethical standards. Compare what happens in Britain: the slightest mention of shady deals leads to a ministerial resignation. Here in Bandit Country Ireland, it takes a JCB and demolition crew to remove a corrupt politician. We definitely have lower levels of accepted propriety in our elected officials. Fianna Fail has to take the majority of blame for this as they are indeed the party with most corruption and least ethics. They have been in government for something like 70+% of the length of the state... thus they also have to take 70+% of blame for what doesn't function. Bertie Ahern has led the Party since the mid 1990s. Despite his stewardship he has made some calamitous decisions: Liam Lawlor appointed to the ethics committee... and remember That Kerry fool who was on the "dirty-Money" commission, who it later transpired had a dirty-money account (Ansbacher)himself... what about Martin Cullen wasting €60m on e-voting machine's that don’t work as supposed to. Him calling us all luddites and then it blowing up in his face... to add insult to the last injury, the storage contracts have gone to associate constituents of Cullen's. He is a crook like the rest of his party... but no inclination of stepping down?... no! He was promoted to minister of Transport. Ray Bourke... enough said... the list is endless and there are lots more... Fianna Fail will continue to be corrupt so long as there are enough fools who consistently vote them in. They currently have a leader who is simply incapable of making a decision. He is so compromised by the vested interests that he will do anything to avoid rocking the boat. All-in-all, an excellent politician (in the Machiavellian sense) but a very poor leader- and I am paying his wage to lead, not smart-arse around the "west bank"... illiterate fool!

But 60 million is a drop in the ocean when the revenues of the govt are 50 billion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.5.17.37 (talk)

[edit] Meaning of Name

It is commonly supposed that "Fianna Fáil" means "Soldiers of Destiny". This, although commonly believed, is wrong, with no supporting evidence that I can find. On the contrary, if one examines the appropriate dictionaries, de Bhaldraithe gives cinniúint and dán as translations for "destiny", and An Gúm adds oidhe. Ó Dónaill and Dineen, as well as translations of much Early Modern Irish poetry, give Fál as meaning "Ireland", and it was a common name for the country during the Gaelic era(otherwise most commonly found today in Lia Fáil ["Stone of Ireland"] and Inis Fáil [Island of Ireland]).

Fianna Fáil translates its name as Soldiers of Destiny. If they translate it that way then other translations are irrelevant. Also it is Cumann na hGaelhael according to its registered name, not Cumann na gGaedheal. It is also the form of name used on the website of the Department of the Taoiseach. History Ireland also names the organisation originally founded by Griffith as Cumann na nGaedhAEl. John Regan's 1994 thesis on the party also uses Cumann na nGaedhAEl. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 00:13, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Do we have a source for "soldiers of destiny"? "Soldiers of Ireland" is a far more obvious translation for anyone who has a good knowledge of Irish. Also, Cumman na nGaedhael is a mis-spelling. It seems to me most unlikely that the party would have used a mis-spelling for their name, and far more likely that later not-very-proficient Irish speakers would have misread it due to the subsequent spelling reform which declared that "ae" was a broad vowel for orthographical purposes.Palmiro | Talk 01:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Under our no original research rule it isn't for us to decide how CnanG should be spelt, merely to reflect how the party using that name spelt it at the time. Primary documents use both versions, but contemporary documents from the period seem to use ae more than ea. It may be that the ae version was principally used in English, and ea in Irish, in which case WP would have to go with the version used by English speakers.

Similarly the nor policy means that what Fianna Fáil should mean is irrelevant. The fact is that it has always been translated as soldiers of destiny.[6][7][8][9] FearÉIREANN\(caint) 01:41, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm not sure how NOR applies to CnaG. Given that any dictionary will tell you that the correct spelling was Cumann na nGaedheal, if both were used as a result of lots of people not knowing how to spell it then we should simply use the correct spelling. Consulting Dineen to find the correct spelling of an Irish word is hardly original research. But surely there must be a party constitution somewhere that can give us an authoritative version of how the party used it?Palmiro | Talk 02:05, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Re FF, the history section of the FF website does indeed cite "soldiers of destiny":
The name Fianna Fáil had a double purpose: it suggested continuity with recent history (as the Irish name for the Volunteers) and also with ancient Irish history. The name Fianna Fáil means ‘soldiers of destiny’ and is taken from Old Irish. The Fianna were the warriors of Fionn Mac Cumhaill. The title emphasised the party’s deep roots over millennia in the historic Irish nation.
However laughable the "party's deep roots over millenia in Irish history" may be, this must be considered a reasonably authoritative statement of what the party thinks FF means. However, if we want to give a translation of what the title means, do we give the official version used by the organisation or also mention the linguistically more probable translation? We are not talking, after all, about the party's English title, for which we must of course give the official version of Fianna Fáil - the Republican Party, but about telling people what the Irish means. That must surely involve, not just telling people what the party thinks the Irish means, but telling people what any Irish speaker would understand it to mean.
By the way, according to Dinneen, fál can also mean bedclothes, which conjures up a whole different set of mental images. Palmiro | Talk 02:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

"The Soldiers of the bedclothes" — I love it! :-) Maybe that explains Charlie and Terry Keane, and Bertie and Celia. lol FearÉIREANN\(caint) 02:38, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

That sort of made my day, finding that. Palmiro | Talk 02:43, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Might I suggest the Workers Party of Ireland page, where the (Irish) translation used by the party is not that cited, as precedent?

Fál does not mean Ireland and doen's mean bedclothes (unfortunately). Not a native speaker myself but have just confirmed it with one as i was surprised to think it meant Ireland. Sorry man!

According to Ó Dónaill (and numerous examples of medieval Irish poetry), "Fál" does indeed mean "Ireland". Buy a dictionary. Sorry man!

  • In no way, at all, in the Irish language does Fianna Fáil mean 'Soldiers of Destiny'. The confusion arises from the Latin name for the Lia Fáil - Saxum Fatale (Stone of Destiny), given to it by Hector Boece in his History of the Scottish People (at least Keating credits him with the neologism). Fál itself comes from the name of a city in the Northern Isles the Tuatha Dé Danann visited and from whence they brought back the stone. Because the stone granted kingship, one of the names they gave to Ireland was Inis Fáil, and through this Fál became a (largely poetic) name for Ireland. Fianna Fáil is the only example of Fál every being translated to mean 'destiny', although I am unclear about when exactly this came into common usage - whether it was an original error of translation; whether it was a mistake that was allowed to gain currency for political expediency; or whether it was a deliberate mistranslation. Cripipper 15:48, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Presumably, then, the article at Irish Defence Forces cap badge, which claims that the FF = Fianna Fáil on the badge means "Soldiers of Destiny", also needs changing. See, too, the discussion at Talk:Irish_Defence_Forces#IDF_badge. Any comments? -- Picapica 10:13, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] politics/ideology

this is nice, long article, but it seems to me there is actually very little on the politics of fianna fáil? if i, as happened to be the case, want to have a quick look what the views of FF is, then in a passing glance i can only find that it has been "slightly left-of-centre", but that it's now an "establishment" party, plus the description as populist/nationalist (whatever that means in ireland today, i wouldn't know). perhaps a short summary chapter on contemporary ideology and political views could be added by someone who knows the issues? i'm afraid i don't. Arre 05:10, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

an interesting question. has anyone satisfactorily established what Fianna Fáil's ideology or views are? Palmiro | Talk 05:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Does Fianna Fáil itself know? I doubt it. lol. Fianna Fáil tends to be whatever it thinks at that moment will make it popular!!! FearÉIREANN\(caint) 20:18, 21 December 2005 (UTC) FF stand for nothing I'm afraid.

Just changed some parts on the peace process.It is entirely biased to say it is an area where FF are especially concerned.All parties in Ireland are. Indeed, previous peace agreements such as the Anglo Irish agreement have been opposed by FF! The matter has been cleared up.

There is little on FF policy because Fianna Fail don't actually have any! They just do what keeps them in power

Memtion should be made of how many of the policies enacted by the party while in power were implemented by centre-left government's in Europe. Mention should also be made of how most Irish parties on the left describe the current government as right wing. FF can fit into both ideological camps using this approach. Most Fianna Fáil members would describe themselves as centre-left republicans, though centrist is probably a better buzz word for this article. TheGeneral1 13:27, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

What about policies from their manifesto?

Who keeps changing the article to say that Fianna Fail is "conservative" and "capitalist"? THOSE are certainly not terms I think can apply to the party. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.134.227.49 (talk) 16:38, August 23, 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "fáil"

I've found that "Republican_Party_(Ireland)" leads to "Fianna_Fáil". Does "Fáil" mean "political party", or "fail", or what?? "Fianna" "...were Irish warrior-hunters,..."

hopiakuta 00:23, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Fianna Fáil means 'Warriors/soldiers of Ireland' (though it is commonly believed that it means 'Soldiers of Destiny'). The party's strapline is its name in English, which is 'The Republican Party', so its full name is 'Fianna Fáil - the Republican Party'. Cripipper 12:45, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Is 'Soldiers of Destiny' therefore the wrong translation of Fianna Fail?


"Fál" means "destiny". However the Lia Fáil (stone of destiny) caused "Fál" to become another name for Ireland. The name was purposefully chosen to be difficult to translate. EamonnPKeane (talk) 17:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] meaning 2

"Also it is Cumann na hGaelhael according to its registered name, not Cumann na gGaedheal. It is also the form of name used on the website of the Department of the Taoiseach. History Ireland also names the organisation originally founded by Griffith as Cumann na nGaedhAEl. John Regan's 1994 thesis on the party also uses Cumann na nGaedhAEl"

That organisation is a totally different party…Cumann na nGael in modern spelling. It is in the genitive plural. The spellings above like with prefixed h and g are nonsensical


“Primary documents use both versions, but contemporary documents from the period seem to use ae more than ea. It may be that the ae version was principally used in English, and ea in Irish, in which case WP would have to go with the version used by English speakers.”

There was a lot of jazz in that period and perhaps miss-spelling is a factor. Part of the problem for the orthography is that the broad and slender spelling rules have trouble with the shift from ao to í or é ([ɰ] to either [iː] or [eː] for most dialects) while the rest of the system remained stable. This left a problem for the writers in the new state as they held Munster as been the purest form of Irish and so imitated that. If they had spelt it Cuman na nGaol the orthographic clash would have not occurred, regardless of other considerations.


“Cumann na nGaedheal”

It is a given that ea stands for a sound not expected there, so ao or ae is the more correct


“The name Fianna Fáil means ‘soldiers of destiny’ and is taken from Old Irish.”

That is most likely propaganda, as most Irish produced in that period by any political party was by native English speakers, using dictionaries, and none scholars of Old Irish. Given that semantics are liable to shift over time, such an assertion must be backed up by diachronic analysis, not opinion. Even then, it’s hardly like having a time machine.

Possibly a mistake was made when using a dictionary or some other pseudo-Celtic thinking infected the naming of it (read: Scotland had a stone of destiny; all Celts are the same etc). Also, fál may have been picked for its alliterative effect once spoken by an English speaker, rather than its semantics. The effect is lost however, if it is pronounced in Irish with two contrasting bi-labials.


“Do we give the official version used by the organisation?”

The meaning of a word in language X is not determined by speakers of language Y, unless speakers of X choose to believe it. A native speaker once asked, may give the ‘destiny’ answer for the whole phrase, but that does not make it correct. The meaning of individual word has not changed. At this remove it is so accepted, that as a phrase, it has come to mean only that for many practical purposes. As the listeners have no Irish, they would have no way of analysing it.

159.134.221.146 19:05, 20 June 2007 (UTC)Jack

[edit] Infobox: Ideology

Rather than this constant editing of the infobox to state that the party's ideology is whatever the beholder envisions it to be (liberal and conservative at the same time, socialist and capitalist at the same time...), can we instead simply describe the party as it describes itself? Cite to their manifesto/webpage where they describe their own ideology, and leave it at that. Anything else (including personal experience) would be original research, which isn't permissible on Wikipedia. Ashdog137 16:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remember WP:BITE

A newcomer several times changed the party's ideology only to have another editor revert his edits. He is understandably confused and left a message at Wikipedia:Help desk. I left a message at his talk page and recommended that he discuss it here. Sbowers3 02:48, 14 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Conservatism

Hey there, some of you may have been wondering who keeps adding Conservatism to Fianna Fails list of ideologies. Well I can tell you now that it is me, however even thought it is a very pro-capitalism party, I didn't add capitalism to the list. I myself am a member of Fianna Fail and one of the attractions for me was the party's very conservative stance, on both social and certain economic issues, aswell as their attitude towards further European Integration and their allignment with the UEN etc. Some bloggers refer to it as the "Irish Tory Party". Since when was Fianna Fail a liberal party? Just take a glance towards the foundation of the Progressive Democrats. Wasn't it founded by ex members of Fianna Fail and Fine Gael who believed their parties were too CONSERVATIVE? I believe it was! Fianna Fail may be married to the Progressive Democrats but it is simply because of the two parties very right wing economic policies. In 2004 didn't Fianna Fail MEP's rebel against the thought of it alligning with the European Liberal grouping? Yes. Why? Becuase Fianna Fail isn't a Liberal Party! Just because Bertie Ahern enjoys having a little flirt with the Liberals and one day even claiming to be a socialist, doesn't mean that the remainder of his party are. Isn't Fianna Fail the party which has never (and hopefully will never) support the legalisation of gay and lesbian marriages? Isn't it the party which opposed the lagalisation of contraception in 1985, when virtually every county in Europe had already done so. Fianna Fail also doesn't support the introduction of "no strings attached" abortion and hopefully never will. You may argue that Fianna Fail has one Liberal element to it and that is the constitutional issue and not much else! Ideologically, Fianna Fail is a right wing party. It may not have started that way, but as time progressed and they didn't focus on the constitutional issues so much, their conservative attitudes to social and economic issues began to flourish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ricardocarey (talkcontribs) 16:25, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

First of all, stop repeating yourself so much. You sound like some excited little kid. Second, there has been some debate about this, but it's important to note that Fianna Fail does not call itself "conservative", though it certainly associates with conservative parties in Europe and has many conservative policies. However, most scholars agree that it is first and foremost a populist party. Since most Irishmen are socially conservative (on abortion, at least), it is willing to cater to this popular sentiment. Otherwise, it has shown a tendency throughout its history to adopt almost any values that are trendy in order to stay in power. It was a fairly leftist-oriented party (much like Sinn Fein) when it was first started; the fact that it seems more conservative now only illustrates its ideological flexibility.

[edit] "Allowing" both governments to exist

The subsection on Reynolds states in part, "Reynolds had favoured allowing both governments". What is that supposed to mean? What are the governments to be allowed to do? To continue to exist? The quoted material needs to be clarified or deleted. -Rrius (talk) 00:14, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Since no one has attempted to clarify or defend the above language, I am going to delete it. -Rrius (talk) 03:10, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Liberal-conservative

FF is definitely centrist, definitely populist and definitely has its roots in Irish republicanism, but it supports also liberal-conservative policies. In government it has been basically a liberal-conservative force. So why not putting "Liberal conservatism" along with "centrism", "populism" and "Irish republicanism"? --Checco (talk) 15:36, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

I asked you to explain why you think FF is an LC party, all you've said is that it has LC policies and is an LC force, way not to answer a question, are you a politician yourself by any chance? ;-) Anyway, FF has only 1 core principle that is to achieve a United Ireland by consent, on social and economic policies it supports what ever is popular with the electorate of the day. For example, a few years ago Mary Coughlan when Minister for Social and Family Affairs implemented rules which banned same sex couples from receiving the same benefits as married couples. In 2008, FF is promising to introduce a bill to legalise same sex civil unions, recent polls have shown a consistent majority of the electorate in favour of this issue now. Whatever way the wind is blowing, there you will find Fianna Fáil! Snappy56 (talk) 03:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
The party is definitely populist and centrist, but its policies in ten years of government have been liberal-conservative, especially on the economy. Many websites describe FF as a liberal-conservative party, for instance see Parties and Elections in Europe. --Checco (talk) 20:55, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
That's seems acceptable then. Snappy56 (talk) 08:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok. --Checco (talk) 09:15, 7 May 2008 (UTC)