There is little evidence that Fianna Fail has understood what is happening to it. Charlie McCreevy is mixing up his trees with his wood. To talk of conspiracies is pointless and dated. It is also, given Fianna Fail's record, a somewhat risky strategy. If a thorough enough scrutiny of Ray Burke's every deed is undertaken, some evidence will be found to justify the feeding frenzy which ended his career. Mr McCreevy's approach is therefore pointless. Fianna Fail would be better to consider the possibility that Ray Burke has not been driven out of politics because of evidence of his guilt, but because he presented a displeasing image to those who run our State.
Their objection to him was primarily aesthetic. He had too much front, too much chutzpah, too much balls, too little charisma. He was too direct, too dogged, too lippy. He never tried to ingratiate himself. He didn't give a flying sugar lump. And that annoyed those who are impatient with what democracy proposes: that those the people choose shall rule. He was also, of course, a member of Fianna Fail.
In short, Mr Burke is gone because he inspired prejudice. I have a strong sense of this because I shared many of the conventional prejudices about him. But I also know that it is always good for me to interrogate my own prejudices. Of the supposed scandals which deposed Mr Burke we know nothing like the full truth.
We have no idea where the trail will lead us. If it is followed diligently and resolutely, I suspect it will lead us to a place from where we will survey not the venality of individuals but the pathology of a society.
A rigorous investigation into the culture of planning in our towns and cities over the past few decades will perhaps unveil a great deal of dubious carry-on. But where lies the greatest immorality: in the fact that the system appears to have been awash with money, or in the fact that this money derived from an uncontrollable greed without any conscience for the consequences of its actions?
Surely the most fundamental questions arising from the planning issue are to do with the manner in which our major cities, especially Dublin, were allowed to balloon out of control to satisfy this greed, with the damage to our society which has resulted?
Which is the greater immorality: a brown envelope stuffed with tenners, or the damnation of a generation? If we really wished to uproot the cancer which has grown out of the planning culture of recent decades, we would declare an amnesty for all of those implicated who would be prepared to tell the truth of what occurred if given immunity from prosecution. This would enable our society to move forward in truth and self-awareness. Similarly with the passports-for-sale issue: surely the question we should be addressing is: what are we doing exchanging passports for investment? Was it for this the wild geese spread the grey wing upon every tide? As always, we have chosen the easy option: picked our scapegoat and dispatched him to the wilderness.
As always, we have acquiesced in the drawing of lines in the moral quicksand, to enable us pre- tend we are dealing with the rot while avoiding it. And once again, Fianna Fail has volunteered to act as the repository of wrongdoing so as to let the rest of us off the hook. The notion that Fianna Failers are more venal than other citizens is now so pervasive in Irish life that even Fianna Failers themselves have come to believe it.
Fianna Fail is in moral meltdown, not so much because of the actions of its members as because of the cultural meaning conferred on those actions. It has been given, and has accepted, the role of moral binliner, into which we propose to shovel all of the difficult moral dilemmas arising from modernisation.
The scenario is clear: when filled with our collective guilt, Fianna Fail will dispatch itself to the refuse-tip of Irish political history. To an extent, the situation is of the party's own making. But recent revelations, such as those about Charles Haughey, have simply vindicated a process which was already well under way.
Mr McCreevy's analysis needs a little more work. He needs to look a little more closely at recent political history. Fianna Fail has been in government for all but 2 1/2 of the past 10 years. But at no time in that period has the party perceived itself as being there to represent the 40 per cent of the electorate still voting for it. It has been in government merely as the transmission system for the wishes, aspiration and demands of the non-Fianna Fail section of the population, as represented in coalition at various times by the PDs and the Labour Party.
Its 40 per cent support was being used simply as a power-pack to jump-start the ambitions of its cultural enemies.
On paper, Fianna Fail always appeared to be the dominant party of government by a long shot, but in reality it was there simply to make up the numbers. So long as it acquiesced in the desires of the non-Fianna Fail world, its continued presence in government was tolerated. But every time the party stepped outside the line drawn for it by its junior coalition partner, acting on behalf of a wider elite consensus, a crisis occurred.
And in every one of these crises, Fianna Fail capitulated, offering a sacrificial victim from among its own ranks to appease its enemies. The only Fianna Fail leader who sought to challenge this situation was Albert Reynolds, and we know what happened to him.
The future for Fianna Fail is therefore bleak. Being unable to comprehend the terminal vendetta which confronts it, the party hopes each sacrifice will be the last, and seeks to justify its cowardice on terms which confer even greater powers on its detractors. And so, the party is doomed to decline decrementally, as each new capitulation eats away at its numbers and its morale. ail, but will do so in a manner permeated by virtue. By the time Fianna Fail has finally been banished, there will not be a voice in the country State to say anything but "Good riddance!" The problem I have with this has to do not with Fianna Fail but with the people from whom that party derives its support. The biggest political mandate in this State might be said to deserve more than gradual obliteration. But the process is so firmly set in train that it is now unstoppable. Fianna Fail, therefore, must begin to face facts.
As things stand, it will never again be allowed to exercise power on its own terms or those of its supporters. It would therefore be better for the party to disband than to continue in the present circumstances, for the long-term result will amount to the same thing. The only hope of survival is for the party to replicate Ray Burke's gesture of last week: to withdraw from power and the pursuit of power, to issue a challenge to its enemies to govern the State in its absence, to depart to the opposition benches, there to wait for, if necessary, the kind of period which it took British society to perceive where lay the true and profound immorality in its own midst. That is the least Bertie Ahern owes to his own people, to this Republic and to the proud tradition which he now finds himself representing.