In my experience, Irish politics had always largely avoided the incredibly divisive, hyper-partisan politics that’s been commonplace elsewhere, most especially the likes of the US where it has become a constant, especially since 2016. That now seems to be changing.

Whilst current Irish political discourse remains relatively civil compared to US standards, the introduction of American-style ‘attack ads’ and ‘tit-for-tat’ briefings from Fine Gael and Sinn Féin signals an unwelcome shift. In some ways, it’s not entirely surprising that both would adopt this strategy. Neither are exactly what one would call the best of friends. But there’s more to this than simply bashing political rivals. Both parties have spied an electoral opportunity: if they can present themselves as being ‘anti-the other party’, they can carve up the political landscape between them.

An old problem made anew

For those of us from Northern Ireland, we’ve seen it all before with the DUP and Sinn Féin. Whilst Fine Gael and the DUP are not similar ideologically, it does seem like the former has taken a leaf out of the latter’s book when it comes to political messaging, especially in regards to the party’s attempts to paint Sinn Féin as still being a major front for IRA activities. Sinn Féin, on the other hand, have past form in this regard too: the party has always had a large, vocal online presence, one which has certainly helped it shape and dominate online activism but also one that has a reputation for being incredibly toxic to the point it’s gotten the party into some trouble. 

Either way, this approach isn’t good for Irish politics at large. This sort of messaging may rile up the party base, but it coarsens political culture and distorts the political landscape. It pushes politics into two distinct camps, where if you disagree with one party on an issue, it means you must be a supporter of the other. Recall for example, how in 2012 the DUP sought to portray the Alliance Party as ‘republican, IRA sympathisers’ due to their councillors having voted in favour of flying the Union Flag at Belfast City Hall on designated days. Or how, if the SDLP criticise or take a different approach to Sinn Féin, they are depicted as ‘closet Unionists’ or reluctant to ‘stand up to’ the DUP.

It also hampers any attempts to maintain cohesive governing institutions. How can one hope to secure the support of others ‘across the aisle’ in times of need? How can individuals needing to be held to account be scrutinised in an effective manner if, as seen recently with scrutiny of Leo Varadkar, it then descends into a shouting match that ends up producing homophobic remarks? One often overlooked consequence of this is that it lets those in need of scrutiny and criticism off the hook, distracting from the ‘original sin’ by having coverage focus more around the blows and jibes traded.

Mitigating the effects

How to change this is a difficult question to answer. My view is that it’s going to be hard to completely detoxify politics, largely because the nature of partisanship and ideology means people have a tendency to retreat into such things when they feel threatened, need reassurance or want to be a part of ‘something bigger’. Nor is banning social media like Twitter a good or practical answer; aside from questions surrounding censorship, people will just go to vent on another, possibly more ideologically insulated site, and the coarseness will continue.

There are a couple of things to consider. The first concerns conduct, both in terms of governance and debate. If politicians violate norms of government or try to bypass and undermine attempts at scrutiny, then that in turn undermines institutions and encourages an ‘if they got away with it, then so can I’ attitude. Undermining your cabinet colleagues by leaking information before announcements or engaging in personal attacks are all examples of things to avoid, and it’s good to see this latter point being picked up on in the Dáil.

The media can also play a role. Whilst it does have its share of tabloids, Ireland thankfully doesn’t yet have a Fox News-esque channel or major media outlet of that nature, so the likelihood of turning on your TV and say, seeing figures whose rhetoric undermines clear and fair election results, is slim. Nonetheless, focusing on the issues at hand and resisting the urge to turn political debates into sporting events is something to think about; maybe don’t decide to go ‘full Ivan Yates’ on things by shouting questions or statements into candidates’ faces for example.

Recognising differences, addressing issues

All of this said, I should make it clear that I’m not advocating for everyone to be ‘neutral’ all the time. I fear that in writing this, I’ve come across as a bit of a ‘centrist dad’ when I’m neither of those things. 

Nor am I saying that Fine Gael and Sinn Féin are necessarily wrong in their respective criticisms of each other. Sinn Féin’s approach to its finances is concerning, not to mention laughable given they’re party supposedly guided an all-Ireland approach to all things, until it comes to party funding rules. As for Fine Gael, Sinn Féin are right to note a weird obsessiveness; one glance at their recent Twitter output suggests that Sinn Féin live rent-free in their heads to the point that major issues like housing or healthcare seem to not matter.

Partisanship isn’t necessarily the problem here; it’s the particular approach taken by the parties. You can stick to a political or governing philosophy whilst still engaging in inter-party discussion. There are major issues – Brexit, housing, migrant rights – that all need to be sorted and will likely require cross-party co-operation if they’re to be resolved. This apparent shift to a more divisive and toxic approach isn’t good for Irish politics. Potential power carve-ups (unsurprisingly) benefit only those doing the carving, leaving behind a political landscape that’s more divided and ultimately, more dysfunctional.