Talk:Fianna Fáil

"The Republican Party"

To what extent is "Fianna Fáil – The Republican Party" is the official name of the party? Searching in Iris Oifigiúil for notices of amendments to the Register of Political Parties I find:

20 February 2004	"FIANNA FÁIL	[30 January 2004] Amendment of the Party Name"
	The Republican Party
16 March 2004	"FIANNA FÁIL	[2 March 2004] Amendment of the Party name"

See the original PDF for the first one; the English is written under the Irish, so it's not clear how they are meant to interact. I surmise that was why it was amended again just one month later.

The current register 23 March 2010 under "Name of Party" just has "FIANNA FÁIL"; contrast "GREEN PARTY / COMHAONTAS GLAS", "COMHAR CRÍOSTAÍ – THE CHRISTIAN SOLIDARITY PARTY", or perhaps "SOCIALIST WORKERS PARTY (S.W.P.)" However, confusingly, the "Emblem" listed is the harp with "Fianna Fáil" and "The Republican Party".

The Constitution of Fianna Fáil says "2. The Movement shall be organised and known as Fianna Fáil, The Republican Party, in accordance with the Rules annexed hereto." The webpage itself is titled "Fianna Fáil: The Republican Party".

Name	Source
Fianna Fáil	Register of Political Parties
Fianna Fáil, The Republican Party	FF Constitution
Fianna Fáil: The Republican Party	FF Website
Fianna Fáil – The Republican Party	FF Website says this was the 1926 name
Fianna Fáil (The Republican Party)	T. Ryle Dwyer says this was the 1926 name
Fianna Fáil the Republican Party	Richard Dunphy says this was the 1926 name

The asymmetric bilingualism is reminiscent of other interchangeables of the age, like "Free State" and "Saorstát", or "Fine Gael" and "United Ireland Party". Then there's "The name of the State is Éire, or, in the English language, Ireland" which suggests "The name of the Party is Fianna Fáil, or, in the English language, The Republican Party". Lemass wanted the English name and Dev the Irish one, so they compromised. There's apparently a 1976 publication called "Iubhaile órga Fianna Fáil, the Republican Party, 1926-76: an chéad caoga blíain" which would suggest the half-Irish—half-English name was constant across both languages; which would make sense. But then the website's Córú Fhianna Fáil says "Is mar Fhianna Fáil, An Páirtí Poblachtach, a eagrófar an Ghluaiseacht", keeping the Irish half and translating the English half.

So is "The Republican Party" an integral part of the title, an optional part of the title, an alternative title, a different-language title, a subtitle, or a description appended to the title? jnestorius^(talk) 20:04, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd say its a subtitle (or possibly a description appended to the title). It may have been part of the title originally but not nowadays. Snappy (talk) 15:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

"Centrist"

The link for the political position of "centrist" is a dead link. Should bring this to your attention before someone removes it and describes it as centre right. For some bizzare reason the consensus is centre. Exiledone (talk) 22:30, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Allegations of corruption.

Really? Is there any reason for having this section? To be honest, I see this section as being a COATRACK against various FF members; they're politicians! Of course they're corrupt! But a section like this is just asking for trouble; there's no section in the articles for the American Republican Party about how their members are... rather friendly to business interests (save a one-line mention of Teapot Dome) or for British Labour Party about how their MPs systematically abused the expenses system to a greater extent than the Tories.

And please, don't resort to lies to keep this content in. The "it's referenced" gambit is a common one used by POV pushers to keep content (I remember someone who tried to claim that a white supremacist blog was a reliable source about Jews). But this fails from a basic inspection of the section. The entire section only has three references: two RTE stories and a transcript of Ahern's testimony to Majon. For a section that talks about (at least) eight living people in reference to potentially libellious statements, there needs, by Foundation decree, completely impeccable sourcing for anything regarding living people.

This is increasingly important given that it's related to a current event (Cowen's resignation/imminent election); more people have been/will be] reading this article, and as Wikipedia is somewhat trusted as a source of information, this may result in people who would otherwise vote FF to not do so, based on this information which would not normally be allowed in an article. It's very important that on political matters Wikipedia remains neutral and not sensationalist. As such, I will remove any content under the BLP and/or NPOV policy unless I'm convinced that the content both passes BLP and NPOV. Sceptre ^(talk) 03:41, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

I partly agree with you that the corruptions section as it is, is not very well written and badly sourced. But to say that there should be no mention of such things because there's an election on is just ridiculous. These are very serious matters which have dominated the Irish news about the party for the last decade; any article on Fianna Fáil must include some mention of these things. And there should be absolutely no problem finding proper sources about it, as it has been in every Irish newspaper's front pages for years. We could start by using the references that already exist in the various individual articles about the people involved (i.e. Brian Cowen, Ray Burke, Mahon Tribunal etc.). --Hibernian (talk) 16:59, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

But spinning it out into its own section violates NPOV in itself, as it automatically assumes a position against FF without saying a word other than "corruption". I have no objection to it being in the history section, with proper sourcing. Sceptre ^(talk) 23:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

General Election Results

"2011 31st Fine Gael-Labour Party government"

Getting a bit ahead of yourselves, no? 121.45.221.196 (talk) 11:13, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Conservatism

I know it is an old chestnut, but I really think it is very misleading to describe the party's ideology as 'Conservatism' (particularly when the source is a German register of political parties which by its definition is not going to be an expert on every party in every country.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica describes them thus: "The party’s ideology has some enduring aspects, notably a commitment to Irish unity, to the Irish language, and to neutrality, though these commitments are essentially aspirational and occasionally merely rhetorical. Generally, the party has been pragmatically cautious on most issues. It has broadly supported an interventionist approach to economic management and, particularly in recent years, has sought agreement on economic policy among major economic interest groups. Socially radical and redistributive in its early years, it soon became more conservative, and it was particularly so under Haughey on such issues as divorce. From the 1940s it promoted itself as the only possible source of stable government."

A party that is interventionist clearly cannot be described as having Conservatism as its ideology (with a capital C). The fact that this issue keeps getting raised clearly shows there is no consensus on this issue. Would it not be best just to describe them as Republican, Nationalist, Populist - on which I don't think you would get any disagreement from any quarter. Cripipper (talk) 15:31, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Anyone? Cripipper (talk) 15:27, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I agree, remove Conservatism. Snappy (talk) 16:50, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

"A party that is interventionist clearly cannot be described as having Conservatism as its ideology". Disagree. The notion that Conservatism is antithetical to interventionism is fairly recent. See One Nation Conservatism in the UK, for instance. The definition of Conservatism within each country evolves (paradoxical as that may sound). Whether Fianna Fáil should be considered as a Conservative party depends on what the Irish mean when they talk of Conservatism. (I'm not saying that it is Conservative; I'm saying we need some Irish perspectives here.) Aridd (talk) 09:07, 22 January 2012 (UTC)