![]() |
|
You are here Home | the south | The state carries on the Republican tradition Next or Previous « Getting some perspective... | Main | Come on the Brirish! »
SOS - Save Our Slugger!
Help fund Slugger's new software: Or mail it direct to Slugger! |
October 18, 2005 The state carries on the Republican tradition Every year there is a tussle amongst Republicans of all shades for the title deeds of Wolf Tone's Republican ideal. It centres on commemoration ceremonies at his graveside in a quiet (derelict?) Protestant churchyard in Bodenstown. Senator Martin Mansergh with his historian's scalpel had a very precise take on the physical force tradition (subs needed) in the Irish Times last Saturday. He cuts to the point when Presbyterian inspired Republicanism fell away from its Belfast based, merchant class origins: The United Irishmen wanted legitimately to form a secular Irish Republic on the model of revolutionary America and France. French aid was two-edged. Stirring up fears of Orange extermination backfired disastrously in Wexford; 30,000 died amidst brutal carnage. He notes that seven men invited William of Orange to take the throne from James, and seven men signed the Easter Proclamation which set Irish independence in train. Big events have small origins. He goes on to argue however that the period from 1916 to independence was the last time the physical force tradition could be argued to have been justified. Sinn Féin points out that terrible and indefensible things happened in the War of Independence. The difference lies in the overall legitimacy of that earlier struggle. Southern Protestants, like American loyalists in the early 1780s, and European settlers in colonial Africa in the 1950s and 1960s, lost out, and there are many sad and some tragic stories. Yet, when the dust settled, and despite depleted numbers, a substantial proportion of the agricultural, business wealth and professional employment post-independence remained in Protestant hands. Martin Mansergh is right that the PIRA, CIRA, RIRA and OIRA have no right to claim to be the same organisation that liberated the 26 counties. Posted by: Brian Boru at October 18, 2005 09:57 AM It is a very self-serving argument though, isn't it? Posted by: slug at October 18, 2005 10:15 AM It's an argument nonetheless. Posted by: Mick Fealty at October 18, 2005 10:17 AM Sorry brian- they had the same aims, and used the same methods to achieve those aims,perpetrated on the same victim class.And of course Fianna Fail passed the torch to PIRA when the government funded the gun running in 1970 precisely because they shared an ideal and it was necessary to sideline the Marxist Officials.
What they achieved may have been retrospectively mandated by the 26 counties, and may have been less bloody in its execution than , say, the life and death of Yugoslavia, but that only makes it less evil-and the ambiguity continues to have consequences, as in the 79 out of 80 refusals to extradite criminals to your fellow EU state since 1980, because of such vital details as leaving an "s" off the name of Evelyn Glenholmes.
Posted by: darthrumsfeld at October 18, 2005 10:20 AM Darth, If you think you're going to get an apology for the people on this island seeking self determination then don't hold your breath.
Posted by: smcgiff at October 18, 2005 10:25 AM "Sorry brian- they had the same aims, and used the same methods to achieve those aims,perpetrated on the same victim class.And of course Fianna Fail passed the torch to PIRA when the government funded the gun running in 1970 precisely because they shared an ideal and it was necessary to sideline the Marxist Officials. " Well if you are going to put it like that I could claim similarity between the Old UVF and the present-day one. By 1918, the constitutional path had already run its course because the Brits kept refusing the democratically-expressed will of the Irish people. In the end only force succeeded in removing the army of what most Irish people considered a foreign nation from the 26 counties. President Wilson in the Paris Peace Conference called for self-determination. The Irish were just as entitled to self-determination. The Dutch had to fight the Spanish to gain independence in the 70 years war 1580-1648. I wonder do you consider the Dutch actions to have been "evil" or "terrorist"? Posted by: Brian Boru at October 18, 2005 10:37 AM And regarding gun-running in 1970, the arms got as far as Co.Louth. They didn't get to the PIRA. Posted by: Brian Boru at October 18, 2005 10:39 AM And as for Ulster Resistance guns. Were they stopped by the state to which they were imported? Posted by: smcgiff at October 18, 2005 10:46 AM The British army didn't mind letting Carson bring guns into Larne but shot at people bringing in Irish Volunteer guns in 1914. Posted by: Brian Boru at October 18, 2005 10:47 AM Mick I am always a bit wary when people come out with self-serving argument, especially regarding the appropriate use of violence. Whether it is old UVF, new UVF, old IRA, new IRA, or indeed any other conflict. In the case of Mansergh, the line he draws is pretty facile and very self-serving. Posted by: slug at October 18, 2005 10:50 AM slug, That's twice you've dissed his argument without actually addressing it. It may be that I've cut it badly from the original piece: one reason why I don't like linking to subscription locked sites. But there's considerable substance to some of things he says (and I've quoted), even if you don't buy the overall argument. Posted by: Mick at October 18, 2005 11:06 AM smcgiff "Were they stopped by the state to which they were imported?" If memory serves it is claimed the UR weapons were imported through the Republic of Ireland, so no the country they were imported to did not stop them. brian boru But the money for guns did get through. Posted by: fair_deal at October 18, 2005 11:07 AM Fair Deal, Were they eventually imported into NI? Were they stopped by the NI government? As you know the Republic stopped the guns to which is being referred. Posted by: smcgiff at October 18, 2005 11:32 AM Well Mick here seems to be the legitimacy argument and its perhaps the least compelling argument in the history of Irish times columnists: "The difference lies in the overall legitimacy of that earlier struggle. Southern Protestants, like American loyalists in the early 1780s, and European settlers in colonial Africa in the 1950s and 1960s, lost out, and there are many sad and some tragic stories. Yet, when the dust settled, and despite depleted numbers, a substantial proportion of the agricultural, business wealth and professional employment post-independence remained in Protestant hands. " Can't see why the #prods with money afterward has any bearing whatsoever on legitimacy. Posted by: slug at October 18, 2005 11:35 AM Brian How many people do you know who were alive in 1914? More witless whataboutery. Posted by: IJP at October 18, 2005 01:13 PM "Well if you are going to put it like that I could claim similarity between the Old UVF and the present-day one. " Yes ostensibly they profess the same aim, but I think the difference in actions is rather significant. The old UVF didn't kill people because of their religion, or deal in drugs, and indeed their drilling was quite clearly legal as the law stood at that time as local magistrates were notified and the aim was the defence of the constitution- you know, like the Volunteers of the 1770s. And of course the universal view of nationalism at the time was that the UVF was a bluff, because..er it hadn't actually indulged in any violence. So perhaps a nationalist's perspective should really be " old UVF: peaceful, posturing at violence; current UVF: violent posturing at being peaceful" "By 1918, the constitutional path had already run its course because the Brits kept refusing the democratically-expressed will of the Irish people." Ah , so now its not just the 1918 general election which is the justification for the violence ( lucky, since we all now know that there was no mandate for independence), it's ...er all the previous elections when there was no popular vote for independence at all. You haven't really got the hang of this election thing yet, have you?
I think we can all agree that the Netherlands wasn't a part of Spain integrated geographically,ethnically culturally, or even religiously and so I don't think your example of the heroic resistance of the House of Orange really helps you. Now Brian, tell me again the differences between the old IRA and PIRA in their professed aims and their actions instead of dodging the question. Posted by: darthrumsfeld at October 18, 2005 03:01 PM "Ah , so now its not just the 1918 general election which is the justification for the violence ( lucky, since we all now know that there was no mandate for independence), it's ...er all the previous elections when there was no popular vote for independence at all. You haven't really got the hang of this election thing yet, have you?" Well, I am counting from when the Home Rulers won most votes in Ireland right up to the 1918 election. The British parliament kept blocking Home Rule. By 1918 we were tired of waiting for Godot - especially after the execution of the 1916 rebels. The terrorism of the Black and Tans also justified armed rebellion against what the vast majority of the Irish people considered an alien regime. Unlike the Provos, the Old IRA (1918-21) did not normally target innocent civilians. Primarily, the targets of the Old IRA were British soldiers, informers and Castle Catholics who betrayed their country (Ireland) by continuing to assist the British adminstration in Ireland, instead of Dail Eireann - the legitimate parliament of Ireland. They were like the French Resistance fighting the German occupation - even if the British regime was not committing the same scale of attrocities as the Nazis. They were freedom fighters. Unlike the Provo's who just killed anyone who happened to be Protestant. Posted by: Brian Boru at October 18, 2005 03:34 PM The arrest of almost all the newly-elected SF MPs straight after the 1918 election was also a provocation that could not go unanswered. Remember also that the Old IRA usually gave warnings to Castle Catholics/Protestants to stop collaborating Vichy-style with the invader. They had a chance to save their lives. Posted by: Brian Boru at October 18, 2005 03:37 PM |
Slugger O'Toole records news, commentary and diverse opinion on Northern Ireland. Produced by Mick Fealty News, tips or crits here: mick.fealty -at- gmail.com Topics a long peace?books Britain Conflict Culture Economy Education election 2003 Election 2005 Enviroment environment Europe Gaeilge Glossary Government Highlights Human Rights Humour International Manifesto Media Nationalism Negotiations Parties Policing Soapbox Society Sport the south unionism
Highlights
Out with the crystal ball...Just a Mo... Commenting Policy A backgrounder on the McCartney affair Northern Bank raid and political fallout, so far
Readers comments
More corrupt than last year? - (4)Living on an island or in a state? - (31) a combination of historical ignorance and monumental self-pity - (42) Payout time... - (4) New Lansdowne revealed - (24) Far right 'imagination'... - (13) Nazi comments were a sectarian slur - (3) The price of peacemaking... - (17) belfast metropolitan area plan unveiled - (23) Why (or rather how) Alec Reid was right... - (37)
Archives
October 2005September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 July 2004 March 2004 October 2003 September 2003 May 2003 |
|
Design: River Path Associates Comments: Big Blog Co Powered:
Movable Type 3.15 Copyright © 2003 Sluggerotoole.com
All rights reserved.
|
<a href="(URL)">hyperlink</a>
It is important that you include http:// when adding the URL.