A Concerning Lack of Political Consequences – by Carl Duffy

In a thriving democracy with an engaged electorate, politicians always need to be mindful of their actions, otherwise they face the possibility of electoral defeat. In Ireland, I’m particularly concerned not only with what some politicians can get away with, but how their political career can sometimes thrive afterwards.

One can accept that there’ll be different economic positions and attitudes towards healthcare or the constitutional question. Effectively, the list of things people can have a political disagreement on is inexhaustive.

However, one would like to think there still remains consensus on some issues across the political spectrum. Particularly, on red-line issues where society has some firmly held principles – or at least, they should have.

An example of a red-line issue to me is the right to life of all human beings, particularly the most vulnerable. While the outcome of the ‘repeal the 8^th’ referendum indicates the majority of people in the Republic support abortion at least in some circumstances. I think there is still a societal consensus that a fully formed 9-month-old baby has the right to life even amongst those who voted to repeal the 8^th amendment.

Yet, SDLP’s Claire Hanna voted in favour of decriminalising abortion up until birth in a recent Westminster vote. Subsequently, a Lucidtalk poll indicates no drop in support for the SDLP following their two MPs supporting something so horrendous. Additionally, Claire Hanna has emerged as the most popular party leader in the North of Ireland.

In Ireland, I feel there’s a consensus amongst the population that they have a right to privacy in their home. Irrespective of being on the left or the right, the majority probably believe An Garda Síochána has zero right to search their devices for content the Government deems ‘offensive’.

Yet one of the architects of the Hate Speech Bill, namely Helen McEntee, proposed that the Irish should have this inalienable right to privacy taken away. An engaged electorate that values our personal freedoms would’ve voted her out of office in the following election. Instead, she received a boost of over two thousand additional first preference votes.

Heather Humphreys also voted in favour of this authoritarian piece of legislation. Yet now she could potentially become a presidential candidate and is multiple bookmakers’ favourite for winning November’s election.

So, what explains politicians being able to attack our most fundamental freedoms – upon which democracy rests – and not only do they face zero consequences, but they can even succeed further in the aftermath.

Some themes from famous writers of dystopian fiction spring to mind. George Orwell spoke about how football, beer and gambling occupied the horizons of our minds. Keeping us in control isn’t difficult. Likewise, Ray Bradbury made a comment about how destroying books wouldn’t be necessary amongst the MTV generation as their attention is already captured.

Our current problems are much worse. Firstly, the internet algorithms and hold on attention are far greater than MTV music videos. Also, the addictiveness of algorithmic content is much more intense than beer or anything Orwell mentioned.

Claire Hanna’s and Helen McEntee’s support of the unthinkable is yesterday’s news and already lost in an oversaturation of information amongst a population with a dwindling attention span. Without electoral pushback can we be surprised that our freedoms are slowly being eroded?

We’ve already conceded too much ground on issues such as free speech and the right to life, it’s only logical to expect that these freedoms will face further erosion as technology becomes more sophisticated with an increasingly disengaged electorate.

Over 40% of the electorate in Ireland didn’t vote in the last elections North and South. We’re in desperate need of some form of democratic awakening to protect our most fundamental freedoms. Only until we start to punish those that will continue to chip away at our civil liberties can we expect to have any hope of preserving a somewhat free society.