On the face of it, Dáil-gate was a blow for the citizen, an expression of the anger being felt throughout the land.
Joe McNamara planned his protest well. He knew that at 7.30am last Wednesday there would be few in the vicinity, thereby ensuring no one would get injured when he drove his concrete mixer truck at the gates of Leinster House. The Anglo Avenger had his slogans strapped on. 'Toxic bank' and 'Anglo' painted in bright red on the barrel of the truck. And the symbolism was potent, an ordinary Joe driving through the barriers that cocoon politicians in the seat of government, far from the struggling masses. Way to go, Joe.

Except this was no ordinary Joe, plucked from the serried ranks of the disaffected. This Joe once bestrode the world of developers. And he has serious form when it comes to developing.

An investigation into development levies in Galway by journalist Enda Cunningham showed that even when the boom was getting boomier in 2006, Joe was failing to cough up for levies. These levies are effectively a tax which developers must pay to ensure that roads and other basic infrastructure can be maintained for the public in the wake of new developments.

Joe still owes €77,053 on levies in relation to 32 apartments he constructed at Inse Beag, Doughiska. In January 2008, he sent a cheque for €50,000 to Galway council for levies, but this couldn't be cashed. Another company with which Joe had been associated owes €861,000 to the council. Despite the boomy times, Joe wasn't in a position to pay his way. Like a lot of others, it now appears he was in over his head. His beef with Anglo concerns a debt of €3.5m, which he borrowed to develop properties.

Now, it is perfectly obvious that Joe is angry at his current station. His anger is directed not just at Anglo, but also apparently the government, or possibly the whole body politic. In this, he is far from unique.

But has he any right to be angry? He borrowed pots of money to take a punt in pursuit of major profit. The punt didn't work out. Joe got lumbered with the debt. Is this not the nature of capitalism, for which developers are poster boys? Okay, the toxic bank was practically giving away money, but surely the matter of personal responsibility is also relevant.

Would Joe still be angry if things had worked out and he walked away with a bundle, which would, in all likelihood, have represented an obscene return on investment? Joe McNamara has reputedly some fine personal qualities, but he's hardly an appropriate touchstone for the anger being felt by many right now.

We have been told that anger is not a policy, but anger is serving as merely a refuge from reality for some during these turbulent times. There are plenty of people who are entitled to be angry at what has befallen them through no fault of their own. There are also plenty, like Joe, who might be better served to engage in a little introspection.

Last week's estimate for the Anglo bailout has left the whole country seething with anger. But there are whole swathes of individuals who benefited greatly through the bubble years while Sean FitzPatrick and his kindred spirits blew the arse out of the boom that went before.

What of the young couple who bought at the tail end of the bubble years, because they were repeatedly warned that they better get in now, or forever remain outside home-ownership. They have a right to be angry.

But then there is the couple who bought four apartments in Bulgaria, and never bothered to consider an exit strategy. They also are strapped now, but who is to blame for their predicament?

Or those among the ranks who ran up huge personal debt for little more than lifestyle choices. Many are now stretched to breaking point, but who is to blame for that? Notions of personal responsibility can be conveniently buried in anger.

Through those heady years there were still plenty who had to borrow just to tog out their children for school, or make repayments on longer term loans. Many others just got by and there were plenty who simply didn't go mad with the limitless credit that was available. Among those categories are the people most likely to have lost their jobs over the last three years. Anger is entirely justifiable for those who benefited minimally, if at all, from the bubble, and now bear the brunt of the clean-up. But there are many others whose anger could do with a little analysis.

All of which brings us to somebody who has been a genuine touchstone for the nation's anger. Every time Eamon Gilmore appears on television his brow is furrowed, his eyes ablaze, as he feels the pain of a multitude of voters.

He has benefited from his performance and is now in the driving seat. To a large extent, the expression of his rage has got him to this point, but what is the quality of that anger? If it is merely to win power, he's cynically sorted.

If his anger has a similar quality to that of Joe the Trucker, it is not rooted in a thirst for real change. If, however, it is genuine, then he is the person in the country best-placed to distil anger into change. For without real structural change in society, public life and government, all that negative emotion will have been a waste of time and effort.

And the fear is some of the ranks of the angry, like our Ordinary Joe, really just want the banks sorted out, so we can get back to where we were before it all went pear-shaped. If that is where Gilmore is heading, plenty of those who are placing their trust in him are going to be mad as hell.

mclifford@tribune.ie