Anyone who has been around Irish politics for any time has seen too many false dawns to be more than moderately enthused by the prospects offered by the new "anti-sleaze" party. Much has been made of the necessity for the new party not to assume that concern about political corruption is a Dublin 4 phenomenon. But this is to see things the wrong way up. What it needs to offer is not anti-sleaze mixed in with a more general policy portfolio, so much as a coherent philosophical platform offering the correct connection between corruption and other issues. What is depressing about the chattering classes' obsession with sleaze is the failure to make that connection, and this failure relates to the essentially tribal character of D4.
In Ireland all politics is tribal, perhaps especially that which sets out to destroy tribalism. The post-tribal society is the most tribal of all. The new tribe sets about defeating the old, but in a manner as to suggest that it is engaged in something entirely new and utterly virtuous. In its attempt to rewrite reality in a manner advantageous to its own interests, it rides roughshod over language and truth. The tribal nature of the response, being encased in the sanctimonious language of modernity, cannot be questioned other than at the risk of "moral" indefensibility.
It is possible to envisage a crusade against corruption based on a zeal for truth, principle and justice; but we have yet to see such a movement here. All of the energy uncovering corruption is fundamentally tribal, an attempt by the forces opposed to Fianna Fail to unseat that party from both the driving seat of political power and the warm embrace of its natural constituency.
This is not to say that Fianna Fail does not deserve to be unseated: the tribunals have uncovered unforgivable breaches of the sacred trust between public representatives and public. But any unseating should be the result of a genuine public response to breach of trust, rather than as an orchestrated coup by secret forces.
There is a profound cultural context here which is wilfully ignored, relating fundamentally to the core differences between Fianna Fail and other parties. What is interesting about the rhetoric of those whose clamouring for truth and righteousness thinly conceals a pathological hatred of Fianna Fail is their faith in such concepts as "The State" and "the rule of law", their allegiance to the forces which inherited the Irish State from the British. What has always set Fianna Failers apart is that they do not believe in "The State" or "the rule of law", and this unbelief is the result not of a perverse outlook or paranoia but of experience and rational observation over many generations.
Fianna Fail, however frequently it has found itself in government, has always been a rebel party. Although the character of its leadership and membership has changed over the decades, the fundamental ethos which maintains Fianna Fail's pre-eminence is that its supporters do not believe the State exists to serve them.
Fianna Fail in office developed an attitude of subversion towards the implements of State, so as to adapt them to the benefit of its supporters; but for complex and paradoxical reasons it never, in power itself, properly began to alter fundamentally the system so as to make such subversion unnecessary. This is fundamentally why Fianna Fail, to the extent it is more corrupt than other parties (a debatable notion), may have been especially vulnerable to the misuse of power by people who understood this rebel ethos and sought to adapt it to their personal advantage.
But curiously, those who lambaste Fianna Fail have likewise done nothing to make the levers of civil society more accessible to those who, advisedly or otherwise, placed their faith in Fianna Fail to mediate with the State on their behalf. In power themselves, the other parties sought, rather unsuccessfully, to emulate Fianna Fail's brand of subversion on behalf of their own; in opposition, they decried this culture for the benefit of D4 and Irish Times editorials.
For the new party to succeed it must not only see itself in an extra-tribal way, but must spurn approaches from those who dress their tribalism up in objectivity and civic-mindedness. The fundamental connection between corruption and "other issues" is not Fianna Fail, but the failure of the Irish people to inherit their own country, nation or State - geographically, spiritually, economically or any other way. The key role of any party genuinely interested in breaking the mould would therefore be in remaking the political and civic culture: not just condemning corruption for the sake of a soundbite, but making the connection, for example, between sleaze in the planning process and the many communities around the State who, even yet, have to fight a system that is blind, deaf and dumb to their needs.
In north Donegal the issue is the threat of ESB pylons across one of the most beautiful areas of the Irish countryside; in north Dublin, it is a handful of Dublin's last farming communities fighting against the imposition of a superdump which would wipe them out. This, too, involves corruption: the corruptions of indifference, expediency and contempt; and these are at least as lethal as brown paper bags.
In the pre-publicity for the new party, there is a strong sense that these agendas are understood, but the real test will be whether the sleazebusters can avoid being waylaid by interests which would be satisfied by the final interment of Fianna Fail. Any party embarking on such a mission would be wasting everyone's time. The only policy this new party needs is a commitment to making the State amenable to all its citizens. A party showing genuine commitment to this is just two elections short of a majority.
jwaters@irish-times.ie