<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Society.ie &#187; Society.ie | Society.ie</title>
	<atom:link href="https://society.ie/author/ruairi-maguire/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://society.ie</link>
	<description>Social Issues Website</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2019 10:04:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.38</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>Elections in Canada: Harper&#8217;s last bow?</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2015/09/elections-in-canada-harpers-last-bow/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2015/09/elections-in-canada-harpers-last-bow/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2015 07:00:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruairi's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservative Party]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[International]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stephen Harper]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=608</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It is certain that the slowdown in the Chinese economy will have far-reaching political repercussions. Across the world, countries reliant on the export of natural resources and commodities are about to enter a period of economic turbulence due to the decline in Chinese demand, with corresponding electoral fallout for those in power. The exemplar here is Brazil, whose economy slid into recession this year. A tanking economy, biting inflation (above 7 per cent)[1] and an expected period of fiscal austerity have combined with discontent at a corruption scandal to make Dilma Rousseff the most unpopular Brazilian president since polling began.[2]  This is a reasonably dramatic illustration of the travails about to be endured by most of South America, and by a broader group of countries reliant on commodity exports. I shall refer to this group as the “Brazil club”. As Canada prepares to go the polls[3], it remains an open question whether it is in the Brazil club or not. Certainly its economy is in recession, and the slide in oil prices has a great deal to do with this. [4] It is clear also that after 9 years of rule by the Conservative Party, during the last four of [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2015/09/elections-in-canada-harpers-last-bow/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>In review: &#8216;The Crisis of the European Union: a response&#8217;, by Jürgen Habermas</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2015/04/in-review-the-crisis-of-the-european-union-a-response-by-jurgen-habermas/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2015/04/in-review-the-crisis-of-the-european-union-a-response-by-jurgen-habermas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2015 09:55:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The Book Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Habermas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=475</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jürgen Habermas, in &#8220;The Crisis of the European Union: a response&#8221; presents a powerful case for (a)  the expansion of the powers of the European Union and (b) (more explicitly than in the case of (a)) the creation of a European &#8220;demos&#8221; or &#8220;civic solidarity&#8221; (p. 53). I shall address his arguments for both (a) and (b) separately, along with his assessment of the constraints in the way of the realisation of both aims. Habermas&#8217; case for (a) is a powerful one; what he argues for is an &#8220;uncoupling of the democratic procedure from the nation state&#8221; (p. 14). In this case, that entails the bolstering of the powers of the European Union. His case for this is roughly characterisable as follows; (i) Democratic government requires that citizens play a role in shaping the forces which (to some substantial degree) govern their lives. I shall leave this controversial thesis unchallenged for the most part, although I believe that there is a strong empirical case to be made that a politically apathetic citizenry is no barrier to good government and the functioning of a liberal (democratic) society. In any case, I think (i) can be modally qualified to the state that democratic [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2015/04/in-review-the-crisis-of-the-european-union-a-response-by-jurgen-habermas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Social Costs of Direct Provision</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2014/12/422/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2014/12/422/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 06 Dec 2014 08:00:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruairi's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asylum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Direct Provision]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Integration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ireland]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=422</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A clear majority of Irish voters approve of the current Direct Provision policy towards asylum seekers [1]. Support for the policy is strong across all social classes, but is especially popular among DE voters, and, surprisingly, among young voters (18 to 34). Given such broad popular support for the current arrangement, it is unlikely that any change to the system is going to be enacted any time soon. But what are the consequences of the direct provision system, both for asylum seekers and for Irish society more generally? For asylum seekers themselves, the consequences of direct provision are unequivocally negative. According to a study from the Irish Refugee Council, “Counting the Cost: Barriers to employment after Direct Provision”, asylum seekers suffer both from the physical effects of poor diet (the current private system of asylum centres incentivises the provision of low-protein food in order to reduce costs and boost margins for owners, who receive substantial compensation for each asylum seeker resident) with the deleterious effects on their mental health resultant from their long-term status as asylum seekers, and confinement in the centres with their often cramped living conditions. The leeway allowed for exploitation given by the current system, combined with the Irish [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2014/12/422/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Far-Right in Europe: Nightmare Scenarios and Inevitabilities</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2014/09/the-far-right-in-europe-nightmare-scenarios-and-inevitabilities/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2014/09/the-far-right-in-europe-nightmare-scenarios-and-inevitabilities/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2014 17:20:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruairi's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Far-Right]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[France]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Front National]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sweden]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=381</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Last Sunday Sweden went to the polls to elect its national legislature. The result was the replacement of a minority centre right administration with a minority centre left one. In Europe an occurrence such as this (or its reverse) is generally of only passing interest. On this occasion, however, the most startling result of the election was not the defeat of the governing parties, but the surge in support for the far-right Swedish Democrats, who captured more than twelve per cent of the vote, making them the third largest party. A few days before this, opinion polls showed that Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National, was topping polls for the French Presidential Election in 2017.[1] The surge in support for far-right parties, made evident at the European Parliament elections this May has, then, not faded. On the back of this, I wish to attempt to answer two questions in this article. The first question concerns the type of scenarios in which continued success for the far-right could result. The second concerns the manner in which mainstream parties could attempt to avert further growth in support for the far right, or, at least, minimise the consequences of such growth. [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2014/09/the-far-right-in-europe-nightmare-scenarios-and-inevitabilities/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Scottish independence: beyond identity</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2014/08/scottish-independence-beyond-identity/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2014/08/scottish-independence-beyond-identity/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Aug 2014 22:02:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruairi's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Independence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Northern Ireland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Referendum]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scotland]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=330</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In less than one month’s time Scotland will hold a referendum on independence from the United Kingdom. This referendum was initially expected to yield an easy victory for opponents of independence, and while opinion polls still indicate a lead for the “No” option in the independence debate (of varying strength) it has become clear that support for independence is not the preserve of a hardline minority, nor an outlet for feelings of national chauvinism. To illustrate this latter point, the opinions of Scottish adolescents[i] regarding both national identity and the question of independence demonstrate that primary identification with Scotland (as against with the UK) is no guarantee of support for independence. For while 53 per cent of Scots between the ages of 14 and 17 identify as either “Scottish, not British” or “More Scottish than British”, only 30 per cent would vote for independence. Similarly, popular sentiment concerning historical and cultural identification with Britain does not support the claim that supporters of independence are motivated primarily by atavism. Asked to consider the statement “If Scotland becomes independent I’ll feel British due to history, geography and culture”, only 19 per cent of respondents either tended to disagree or disagreed strongly[ii]. In [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2014/08/scottish-independence-beyond-identity/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>European Integration and Popular Sentiment</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2014/08/european-integration-and-popular-sentiment/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2014/08/european-integration-and-popular-sentiment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2014 19:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruairi's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Identity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Integration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=293</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Around the time of Jean Claude Junker’s nomination by the European Parliament to serve as President of the Commission, it could frequently be heard that Junker’s brand of euro-federalism was a sort of “relic”. Few believe any longer in the viability of the integrationist project, it was said, and Junker’s appointment served merely to demonstrate the dearth of guile on the part of European leaders. The ultimate proposition here is that European federalism is in permanent retreat. With the increasing electoral appeal of nationalist and eurosceptic parties of both left and right, and the spectre of British exit, it should appear to be a difficult business to deny the truth of the above. There is, however, a sizeable degree of evidence to suggest that the decline of popular support for European integration is both smaller and more ephemeral than believed.  To begin with, while there is evidence to suggest the unpopularity of European institutions, there is little evidence to suggest an equally pronounced decline in support for membership of the EU among individual nations. The graphs below represent popular estimation of the European Commission and European Parliament respectively, with data ending in June 2014. These demonstrate the fall in public [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2014/08/european-integration-and-popular-sentiment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Modern European social democracy in crisis</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2014/07/modern-european-social-democracy-in-crisis/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2014/07/modern-european-social-democracy-in-crisis/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 18:05:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruairi's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Europe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Labour]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Democracy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[UK]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=213</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The central question for established centre-left political parties in Western Europe is whether there remains a viable future for traditional social democracy, among whose features we might number support for the mixed economy and the institution of large cash transfers with the aim of redistributing wealth and easing poverty. Recent developments within the aegis of the British Labour Party indicate that the party is alive to the futility of attempting to defend some elements of the post-war settlement. A recent think-tank report by the Institute for Public Policy Research, The Condition of Britain, augers a major shift in the rhetoric of social democrats. Most strikingly, in reference to the above, is the assertion that “[e]xcessive reliance on cash transfers to raise incomes has the effect of leaving people dependent on the spending preferences of the government of the day rather than experiencing the respect and dignity that comes from earning a living.&#8221;[i] Reflecting also a recurrent theme of Labour’s policy co-ordinator, Jon Cruddas, the report advocated transferring power to municipal level in a number of areas of public service provision. It is clear that many in Labour, following the alleged centralising and statist tendencies of the Blair and Brown years, [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2014/07/modern-european-social-democracy-in-crisis/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>PR-STV and electoral reform in the Republic of Ireland</title>
		<link>https://society.ie/2014/06/pr-stv-and-electoral-reform-in-the-republic-of-ireland/</link>
		<comments>https://society.ie/2014/06/pr-stv-and-electoral-reform-in-the-republic-of-ireland/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Jun 2014 19:25:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ruairi Maguire]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Articles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ruairi's digest]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Elections]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[List-PR]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Voting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://society.ie/?p=156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The character of high politics in the Republic of Ireland has, as a consequence of the cluster of crises and controversies around the first decade of this century, come under a degree of impeachment. Central to the claims of its accusers is the notion that Irish legislators are not sufficiently national in their outlook, preferring instead to tend to the purely situational concerns of their constituents. As a consequence of this, the electoral system of PR-STV (the first two letters of the initialism are redundant &#8211; in reality, the system is not proportional as any even rudimentary index of that quality or its absence should demonstrate) is frequently fingered as a source of political malfunction. Its operation, on the basis that it compels competition between candidates ostensibly competing on the same program, and under the banner of the same party, puts incumbents under the constant necessity to devote a very great deal of their time to the maintenance of purely personal bases of support, to the detriment of their ability to reflect, read and cogitate. This, at least, is the argument. Such an elementary truth is this (or, at least, is the initial proposition), that little energy is spent on [&#8230;]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>https://society.ie/2014/06/pr-stv-and-electoral-reform-in-the-republic-of-ireland/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
