"Belfast Greyhound" has kindly sent me two posts via email, the first is reproduced below:
"40 years of more or less open conflict, 30 years active and now the more passive years of a peace process, shows up some odd results at the level of the concerns of the Plain People of Ireland it seems.
The last few days a recurring theme on the Joe Duffy Show has been what can actually be counted as Irish produce to be sold in shops. Chickens it seems, born and reared in Co. Tyrone are not 'Irish' chickens but British in origin. If they were to apply for a passport they would have to get a British and not an Irish one by common consent of the listeners who rang the show complaining that it was wrong for them to be marketed as Irish when they were from the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
While a lot of the contributors talked about chicken and other produce from the North and contrasted this with produce from the South of Ireland the telling phrase 'from Northern Ireland' was used constantly.A distinct contrast to the convoluted way that Nationalist/SF politicians talk about 'the North of Ireland'.
Common sense consumerism in the Republic seems to have a better grasp on reality than Northern Ireland Politicians of a particular political bent.This is not a small a point as might a first sight it would seem. One would have imagined that with the growth of Cross-Border bodies and the claims of SF that they have the re-unification of the island now on the political agenda, attitudes like this expressed by people in the Republic show that at the most basic level the Island of Ireland is certainly one made up of two established and enduring separate jurisdictions.
It is a measure of the total lack of success of SF that their activities over the years have set in stone attitudes completely at variance with their intended outcome - especially where they might have expected their message to have most support. Attitudes about what is Irish (and the poor representative from Tesco who was trying to argue that by being born on the island of Ireland should qualify a chicken as Irish for promotional offers was getting absolutely nowhere with this as an argument) are basic to notions of what being Irish is.
Perhaps there is hope for the future here if common sense breaks out and replaces the static mindset of the politicians who cannot see further than the lst slogan they thought went down well with the backwoodsmen in their parties.
The Union may be less under threat than SF would have us think.
Indeed what might actually be the truth is that the Plain People of the Republic of Ireland actually fear the threat of a United Ireland more than the Plain People of Northern Ireland fear it as a reality to be faced.
Interesting time we live in perhaps, especially with the upsurge in Dissident Republican violence and the way Compliant Republicans are caught on the petard of trying to confirm violence now as criminal while presenting their own previous activities as in the true traditions of dissent, makes their position less and less convincing as sustainable and coherent one.
Faugh a Ballagh"
19 comments:
>>and the way Compliant Republicans are caught on the petard of trying to confirm violence now as criminal while presenting their own previous activities as in the true traditions of dissent, makes their position less and less convincing as sustainable and coherent one.<<
I'd imagine you would be the "compliant" type Oneil whilst the state where you happened to live in treated you as of the second tier of a two-tier society. Yep there would be no conditions at all that would cause you to challenge an unfair government.
Those conditions certainly do not exist at the moment. Should Republicans/Nationalists resort to violence at the present time it would only underwrite the lies those of your ilk and the British sought to tell the world during the conflict. However the inequality of the six-county state and British oppression shone through despite it all.
Deal with it!
Tony,
Not guilty on this particuliar occasion, check the top of the post, it's a guest one - I'll let Belfast Greyhound have the priviledge;)
Belfast Greyhound,
Reading the post, I was thinking of the present nonsense over the UK City of Culture - there was actually an attempt by a SF councillor to deny that the city was technically a part of the UK!
It's that kind of attitude which, although it plays well with their core vote in NI, continues to hamper them in the ROI.
One final point, I don't know if you've read Godson's biography of Trimble but one of the funniest passages in it was when Trimble was pushing for a Border Referendum.
The ROI's DFA which had played, sometimes destructively, on the same side as SF and SDLP for the negotiations was seriously disturbed by Trimble's suggestion.
Quite possible the DFA had been listening too closely to SF pie in sky "Unity by 2000" stuff but even so, one of the DFAers apparently almost had kittens and was overheard to ask of the HMG delegation nervously: "You don't think there's any chance he might lose it do you?"
They knew/know which side their bread's buttered on!!!
article is delusional - far below the usual standard for this blog
Tony,
I'm sorry to find too much of what you write as just an easy re-statement of self-serving cultural myths.
The most oppressed people in the history of the world rose again in rebellion to secure bread and rights which had been denied under the jackboot etc etc etc...... sort of argument.
It is well known as a line of belief and by and large goes unchallenged as a notion within the camp where it serves as a sacred cow for worship.
There were no conditions in Northern Ireland that would have justified the prosecution of the sort of anti-community violence which was inflicted for more than 30 years on the innocent citizens on both sides of the political divide by any group.
What remains here as an enduring truth is that the Compliant Republicans have a circle to square.
How can they maintain their claims to have been acting on the behalf of the oppressed when much of their violence was directed against that oppressed community.
How can they justify the fact that what they secured was the strengthened British presence in Ireland and their involvement in governing Northern Ireland as part of the British Stae.
How can they justify their own violent acts in prosecuting the 'war' as being morally good and entirely devoid of moral ambiguity and entirely justified and at the same time mark those Dissident Republicans who carry out the selfsame sort of acts of violence as criminal carried out by criminals.
Especially so as the de facto situation is that the previous rebels are now the established agents of the state and the divisions within the state are more more structurally cemented into the consciousness of society.
Northern Ireland is now more severed and structurally divided than before the start of the community violence.
Worse, nothing has been achieved through that violence than could not, and would not, have been achieved through entirely peaceful and democratic means.
The failure of the the 'war' is that nothing has changed expect Britain is just as firmly in Ireland as ever.
But the need for the Compliant Republicans to fudge the moral ambiguities in what they have done over the years of violence as somehow 'uncriminal' and the same acts now done in the same tradition as criminal remains the elephant in the Republican room.
Urban_Underclass your opinion is valid but but how much it advances any argument I cannot judge.
Oneil
You managed to sneak someone past me. To be honest whilst reading it, it struck me that you had taken a retrogade step in your understanding of others views.
>>Reading the post, I was thinking of the present nonsense over the UK City of Culture - there was actually an attempt by a SF councillor to deny that the city was technically a part of the UK!<<
She actually makes a lot of sense, n that it is a unique chance to present an irish city with strong British ties.
BG
What a monologue!
>>The most oppressed people in the history of the world rose again in rebellion to secure bread and rights which had been denied under the jackboot etc etc etc...... sort of argument.<<
Actually the only people I have ever witnessed making this type of argument are a certain type of Unionist who refuses to face up to reality. The reality being that Irish nationalists were treated as of the second tier in a two-tier society that may now be one of Unionist hegemony, but then was one of Unionist supremacy.
We only have to witness how difficult many Unionists have with equality.
>>There were no conditions in Northern Ireland that would have justified the prosecution of the sort of anti-community violence which was inflicted for more than 30 years on the innocent citizens on both sides of the political divide by any group.<<
Well Nationalist and Catholic civil rights demonstrations showed us how non-violent protest would achieve parity. Burntollet and Derry serve as condemnation.
>>What remains here as an enduring truth is that the Compliant Republicans have a circle to square.<<
You have a very colonial compliant mindset, if you don't mind me saying so. I suppose you would. Describing peace-makers as compliant............compliant to British rule? In a way Aye. Compliant to Unionist domination, you know the good old days when you reckon that no conditions existed that would cause people to take up arms? Certainly not.
I suggest your use of the word "compliant" only serves to antagonise and mis-subscribe.
>>nothing has been achieved through that violence than could not, and would not, have been achieved through entirely peaceful and democratic means.<<
Absolute revisionist nonsense! The last 20 years have shown us that Unionists had to be dragged kicking and screaming through the peace process. Pray tell us how the would have came quietly and allowed equality. Do you not recall the events of 1974 in your reading?
There is no fudge nor moral ambiguities at all. You may well be the compliant sort who will happilly live under the sort of conditions that nationalists lived under in the sectarian state. Bullyfor you, the SDLP would have welcomed you with open arms.
Belfast Greyhound,
I am utterly busy and don't have time to fully analyze this thread, but to equate the feelings of southern Irish people on the national question with their attitudes to imported chicken is stunningly delusional. It is beyond shallow or glib or patronizing.
In the south we have a problem due to the f***** up partition of this island that shop workers are going on the dole daily as greedy bastards head north to buy their imported processed food and booze cheap.
Sorry about the languge and tone but this post is just annoying from a blog I usually trust.
Rory
The last few days a recurring theme on the Joe Duffy Show has been what can actually be counted as Irish produce to be sold in shops. Chickens it seems, born and reared in Co. Tyrone are not 'Irish' chickens but British in origin.
Hold yer horses there. I was actually listening to the programme in question and that most definitely was not the point people were trying to get across. The point they were trying to get across was that the chickens (and other produce) was being marketed as Irish and made in the Republic of Ireland, with the Irish tricolour being used. And thats where people rightly took issue. If food is not manufactured in the republic of ireland then it should not be labelled as such.
That is a very different to saying that people in the ROI were trying to distance the "Irish" label from food produced in NI.
Tony,
I have been having problems with my server so the lack of quick response to your last.
You make a lot of points but miss the problem I feel.
What really did the years of strife and bloodshed actually achieve?
The removal of the British rule in Northern Ireland? Abject failure to meet this objective as the state is more secure than ever now that the Compliant Republicans are actively engaged in the ruling process.
The removal of divisions in society?
Again an abject failure since before the 'war' started the divisions were much more semi-permeable and the not physically reinforced by the biggest system of separation wall in Europe.
The removal of a sectarian mindset in the general population?
Absolutely not - the sectarian divisions are reinforced by the existence of the walled in communities.
Reawaken a long term sympathy in the Irish Republic for an urgent reconciliation of the two separate jurisdictions on the island of Ireland?
Certainly not as the attitude of the citizens of the Republic now seems along the lines of 'Oh yes, but not yet!!'
It would be useful if SF was to publish what it counts a measures of success for all the hurt, trouble and violence it carried out, much of it against what might be easily described as its own support base, so we can judge any claim it makes to success.
The move from 'war' to a Peace Process perhaps?
That certainly was worth all the dead maimed emotionally scarred and injured wasn't it?
The formation of a Power-Sharing Executive that looks more like a football league fixture list, Home and Away, that is so successful a model of reconciliation that it is now adopted all over the world where separate communities need to come together?
Hardly so and the notion that there can be no looking at the institution to see what the flaws inherent in it are and fix them without being decried as a negative revisionist spoiler spoils every attempt to actually see the elephant in the Parliamentary room.
Were the undemocratic conditions that existed before the 'war' so bad that the 'war' has all the conditions that we might expect for it to be called a just war?
In other words were people living in conditions SO bad that democratic change was impossible?
Most certainly not and the sad fact now remains that the long war was not just unnecessary but in the end produced no success.
Little wonder the Dissents claim to be acting in the same traditions as the Republicans who now occupy the corridors of power in the British State in Northern Ireland did when they were in more 'active' mode.
To paraphrase what a well known Republican once said, 'The ideas havn't gone away you know!!'
BF
>>What really did the years of strife and bloodshed actually achieve?<<
A lot of hurt and wasted lives. As for progress, if only Unionists were as 'compliant' then as they are now. or more importantly if the British government didn't mollycoddle Unionist despotism, and forced them into the 20thC may have helped.
>>The removal of the British rule in Northern Ireland?<<
The vast vast majority of nationalists would have just made do with anything approaching equality. Pity that they were battered off the streets everytime they peacefully demonstrated this wish.
Once they realised that the British forces who came to aid them from the brutality of the NI state were there to simply uphold Orange/Unionist domination then the only realisation could be that British influence in Ireland had to end. Was the campaign a failure? In one way, aye! However peaceful honourable compromise is prefferable to interminable war for no purpose.
The legacy is that 30 odd years were wasted because Unionists refused to recognise that nationalists were deserving of parity. Unionist bigotry was allowed by the British to drive British policy in Ireland, a policy that they have regretted ever since. A policy that caused untold bloodshed and many wasted lives.
>>In other words were people living in conditions SO bad that democratic change was impossible?<<
The sense of hopelessness that engendered the armed uprising came from Nationalist communities who realised that the british army were there just to underline Unionist rule. We have already established that the conditions were abhorrant. Live on your knees or get beat up for protesting. Not a choice that any people should have to make. You should recall from your reading that the IRA only existed as a memory then, an odd rusty revolver or memories of a few WW1 rifles buried in some backyard.
The dissidents have been claiming the same things that they are the only legitimate authority to act for the state of Ireland since I first came across them in the early 90's in Donegal. They do not represent anybody, Unionist intransigence only fuels their squealing. Having Unionists gleefully blocking Irish culture, frothing at the mouth to force triumphalist bigotted parades down their streets. using petty delaying tactics to prevent the recent implementation of already agreed strutcures etc all play into their hands.
However I suspect you like many other Unionists know this. Some of you will only be content when conflict arises again.
Tony,
I tend to agree with the thrust of your comment, but as usual, the role of the Officials in driving the (entirely justified) Civil Rights Movement is being airbrushed.
From the proclamation of the Irish Republic:
"We declare the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible. The long usurpation of that right by a foreign people and government has not extinguished the right, nor can it ever be extinguished except by the destruction of the Irish people. In every generation the Irish people have asserted their right to national freedom and sovereignty: six times during the past three hundred years they have asserted it in arms."
There's a new generation there and it's not Provies. The Belfast Agreement is about to join O'Leary in his Fenian grave.
This is my cold analysis. I've been thinking and reading about this a lot recently.
Regards,
Rory
Rory
The time has gone. There will be a united Ireland though it will not be borne by these means. As long as people see progress(hence why the pitiful SF were finally forced to step out of the shadow of the unionist dominated office of FM/DFM) then they will rather this than get involved in resolving the issue through violent means.
We all know, especially the unionists that every bit of compromise brings us closer to a united Ireland, hence why they bitch and scream and holler before finally being dragged another inch. Only the Brits don't prop them up any more but simply scratch their heads at the absurdity of it all. 16thC politics for the modern man.
Just to clarify, I a, bot predicting, and hope there won't be, a return to violence.
This nonsense in Stormont though, it can't go on much longer, who wants it? Some political careerists on both sides, that's all.
Rory
Tony,
I presume you had not seen my follow up comment, I realized after writing the first that it might seem that I was predicting a return to wholesale political violence, I was not. There is no appetite for that, it serves no purpose.
It's easy,
Let the Tory Unionists run their crummy little statelet and work on poitically educating the protestant working class. Destroy the gombeen culture in the Free State and bring about a 32 county worker's republic.
Might even be done by 2016 as the Shinners are predicting.
Rory
I had only say your first Rory.
Of course it would have been car crash stuff a united Ireland say in the seventies. And the Unionist working class have wizened up to the bastards who led them up the hill continually. Sure many still stick to a dying OO for cultural(sic) reasons, but education and seeing that Nationalists are not the inhuman monsters who will eat their weans and make them live in Papal devotion helps.
I am very good pals with one Loyalist and have had many a good chat on these topics, rancour free. let's just say I am helping him to work through his issues ;¬)
Tony,
I read with interest what you write but I feel that your reliance on a sort of mixture of conspiracy theory coupled with viewing things through nationalist coloured spectacles is skewing your perceptions.
The war was not necessary was kept going because the prosecutors did not know how to stop it and in the end achieved nothing over 30 years that peaceful means would not have secured.
The 'war' was a failure and Republicans are stuck in the mire of their own making unable to make convincing arguments that separates their actions from the same one that Dissident Republicans are now making since after all nothing really has changed - we are still part of the UK and the only difference now is that they (SF) are part of the Governing Class.
Either the 'war' was a success or it was not. The evidence says it was not.
Talk of a wonderful new life under a 32 County Workers Republic is so beyond comprehension of people who live in real worlds as to be entirely risible.
Good knockabout stuff for saloon bar discussions on the same sort of level as the Trots used to make about the necessity of opposing CND because the Workers Bomb was needed to secure world peace.
A great deal of heat and a near absence of light in the end.
BG,
Keep your head in the sand if it keeps you happy, one good way of getting your arse kicked though.
Rory
BG,
Keep your head in the sand if it keeps you happy, one good way of getting your arse kicked though.
Rory
BG
>>The war was not necessary was kept going because the prosecutors did not know how to stop it and in the end achieved nothing over 30 years that peaceful means would not have secured.<<
Totally agree, if only Unionists had been amenable to peaceful means rather than meeting peaceful protest with violence. Violence begets violence don't you know!
As far as not knowing how to stop the war........arguably the IRA had tried several times, no not arguably.....definetly! They tried in the 70's with all the secret negotiations with the British government. They were open certainly from the mid-eighties to ending it and it was Gerry adams and John hume who initiated the process that got us where we are now.
>>..The 'war' was a failure and Republicans are stuck in the mire of their own making unable to make convincing arguments that separates their actions from the same one that Dissident Republicans are now making since after all nothing really has changed..<<
Bit dissapointed that you really have nothing to offer on the discussion apart from parroting a load of nonsense. I have already covered this, disagree with me in detail if you like rather than vagueries whilst ignoring my previous contributions on the matter......c'mon it is downright discourtous! Invite a girl to a dance and then don't dance whilst telling her how great a dancer you are.
>>we are still part of the UK and the only difference now is that they (SF) are part of the Governing Class.<<
Absolutely true, so why are you not happy with all the measures that add up to equality for all?
>>Either the 'war' was a success or it was not. The evidence says it was not.<<
BG, are you aware there are degree's of success and failure. An easy one for you to reflect on. The British played a small part in winning WW2, she was one of the victors. Yet the war bankrupted Britain, she lost her empire and came under the hegemonic influence of a newer and greater power to which she was in hock up to the eyeballs. Now the vanquished of WW2 are two of the richest nations in the world. Britain won the war, the evidence says she didn't.
>>Talk of a wonderful new life under a 32 County Workers Republic is so beyond comprehension of people who live in real worlds as to be entirely risible.<<
Perhaps but it would be infinitely better than the unequal one that Unionists wished to preserve.........do you agree or not?
Awfy quiet here BG!
Post a Comment